2019
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-32245-8_24
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Globally Guided Progressive Fusion Network for 3D Pancreas Segmentation

Abstract: Recently 3D volumetric organ segmentation attracts much research interest in medical image analysis due to its significance in computer aided diagnosis. This paper aims to address the pancreas segmentation task in 3D computed tomography volumes. We propose a novel end-to-end network, Globally Guided Progressive Fusion Network, as an effective and efficient solution to volumetric segmentation, which involves both global features and complicated 3D geometric information. A progressive fusion network is devised t… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
25
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, most of the classic methods of pancreas segmentation use fourfold cross-validation. [36][37][38][39][40] In order to conduct a more fair comparison test, this article uses the same four-fold cross-validation method for comparison. In this study, 3D model segmentation is better when the pancreatic head or tail has a complex shape, as shown in Fig.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, most of the classic methods of pancreas segmentation use fourfold cross-validation. [36][37][38][39][40] In order to conduct a more fair comparison test, this article uses the same four-fold cross-validation method for comparison. In this study, 3D model segmentation is better when the pancreatic head or tail has a complex shape, as shown in Fig.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although, fourfold cross‐validation is a relatively ideal result. However, most of the classic methods of pancreas segmentation use fourfold cross‐validation 36–40 . In order to conduct a more fair comparison test, this article uses the same four‐fold cross‐validation method for comparison.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…9) is rather small, we can get enough receptive field in the inter-slice dimension without downsampling. Regarding 2D feature map conversions, Fang et al [13] proposed to extract C 2D feature maps (1 × 1 × H × W ) corresponding to the center slice and concatenate them to form the converted 2D feature map of size (C × H × W ). However, this method can not fully exploit the 3D context information resided in other adjacent slices.…”
Section: D Context Modeling With An Mp3d Resnet Backbonementioning
confidence: 99%
“…MP3D with 7 slices as input get the best trade-off between effectiveness and efficiency. Conversion Type: Table 3 demonstrates the comparisons of proposed GTM with the center-cropping transform module (CTM), which is proposed by Fang et al [13]. The proposed GTM brings better results as it can efficiently aggregate information from all adjacent slices for further detection.…”
Section: Ablation Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…But the 2.5D structure is destroyed by the network with 2D convolutional layers. Recently, Fang et al 14 and Chen et al 9 combine 2D and 3D sub‐networks in their model. This combination is designed to capture both global features and 3D geometric information.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%