2020
DOI: 10.1007/s11548-019-02113-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ultrasound needle segmentation and trajectory prediction using excitation network

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
37
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 36 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
1
37
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our algorithm demonstrated much poorer performance in kidney images than the other applications in this study; however, the DSC of 58.0% prior to postprocessing is similar to the value of 56.65% reported by Lee et al 37 Additionally, our median angular error of 2.9°for the kidney ablation tools may offer a substantial improvement over the angular error of 13.3°reported by Lee et al, 37 though a direct comparison is not possible given the use of RMS error in that study. Assuming a similar pixel size, our tip error appears larger than the distance error from the Lee et al 37 study; however, their value does not represent the tip error, which is often much higher since the largest segmentation challenge is typically the early truncation of the tool path in the insertion direction. The high errors reported by both studies on the localization of tools in kidney images shows the US visibility challenges associated with steep tool insertion angles and increased number of anatomical interfaces with similar echogenicity, emphasizing the need for further research in this area.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 68%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Our algorithm demonstrated much poorer performance in kidney images than the other applications in this study; however, the DSC of 58.0% prior to postprocessing is similar to the value of 56.65% reported by Lee et al 37 Additionally, our median angular error of 2.9°for the kidney ablation tools may offer a substantial improvement over the angular error of 13.3°reported by Lee et al, 37 though a direct comparison is not possible given the use of RMS error in that study. Assuming a similar pixel size, our tip error appears larger than the distance error from the Lee et al 37 study; however, their value does not represent the tip error, which is often much higher since the largest segmentation challenge is typically the early truncation of the tool path in the insertion direction. The high errors reported by both studies on the localization of tools in kidney images shows the US visibility challenges associated with steep tool insertion angles and increased number of anatomical interfaces with similar echogenicity, emphasizing the need for further research in this area.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 68%
“…The simpler approach to tool fitting was implemented using a largest island postprocessing technique to save only the largest connected region of predicted pixels, as has been previously studied. 37 A linear least-squares fit on this map was then used to predict the tool's tip and trajectory. In an attempt to establish the tool axis more robustly in the presence of disconnected outlier regions, a RANSAC model-fitting approach 12 was also evaluated.…”
Section: C Postprocessing and Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The initial trajectory region is analyzed with ranklet and Radon transforms. Lee et al [27] used neural networks and spatial information to segment and track the needle tip. Xu et al [28] proposed a pipeline that includes thresholding, morphological operations, and maximum likelihood estimation sample consensus algorithm.…”
Section: Related Studies In the Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%