2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.compmedimag.2004.07.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Segmentation of abdominal ultrasound images of the prostate using a priori information and an adapted noise filter

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

5
37
0
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 64 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
(37 reference statements)
5
37
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The average DSC value of our method with 0.95±0.01 is comparable to mean DSC values achieved by Betrouni et al 7 and Ladak et al 17 and inferior to the area overlap measure of Abolmaesumi et al 16 of 98%. However, it is to be noted that we have used more images (24 images) compared to 6 images of Abolmaesumi et al Our MAD value of 1.50±0.41 mm is comparable to Gong et al…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 69%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The average DSC value of our method with 0.95±0.01 is comparable to mean DSC values achieved by Betrouni et al 7 and Ladak et al 17 and inferior to the area overlap measure of Abolmaesumi et al 16 of 98%. However, it is to be noted that we have used more images (24 images) compared to 6 images of Abolmaesumi et al Our MAD value of 1.50±0.41 mm is comparable to Gong et al…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 69%
“…To address the challenges of prostate segmentation in TRUS images Shen et al 6 and Betrouni et al 7 proposed to use prior prostate shape information in their models. Prior shape information made the models robust to imaging artifacts and detected true prostate edges in low SNR.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Analyzing the results, we observe that our mean DSC value is better than the area overlap accuracy values of Betrouni et al [3] and Ladak et al [14] and very similar to the area overlap error of Shen et al [18]. However, it is to be noted that we have used more images compared to Shen et al Our MAD value also shows improvement when compared to [3], [18], [14], [6] and [19]. From these observations we may infer our method performs well in overlap and contour accuracy measures when assessed qualitatively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…The mean segmentation time of the method is 0.67±0.02 seconds with an unoptimized Matlab code. Even with an unoptimized Matlab Table 2 we observe that our mean segmentation time is better when compared to [3], [18] and [6], although inferior to [19]. However, [19] used an optimized C++ code to achieve their results.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…Shen et al [125] proposed an automated technique that utilized Gabor [126]based appearance features to guide an ASM for prostate segmentation. Another automated technique proposed by Betrouni et al [127] was based on optimizing an ASM to segment the prostate. Zaim and Jankun [128] used an ASM, guided by extracted image appearance features to find the prostate boundary.…”
Section: A In-vitro Prostate Cancer Diagnostic Technologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%