journal article·2021Open access

Deep Learning in DXA Image Segmentation

Dildar Hussain, Rizwan Ali Naqvi, Woong-Kee Loh, Jooyoung Lee

Computers, Materials & Continua· Volume 66· Issue 3

Abstract

Many existing techniques to acquire dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) images are unable to accurately distinguish between bone and soft tissue. For the most part, this failure stems from bone shape variability, noise and low contrast in DXA images, inconsistent X-ray beam penetration producing shadowing effects, and person-to-person variations. This work explores the feasibility of using state-of-the-art deep learning semantic segmentation models, fully convolutional networks (FCNs), SegNet, and U-Net to distinguish femur bone from soft tissue. We investigated the performance of deep learning algorithms with reference to some of our previously applied conventional image segmentation techniques (i.e., a decision-tree-based method using a pixel label decision tree [PLDT] and another method using Otsu’s thresholding) for femur DXA images, and we measured accuracy based on the average Jaccard index, sensitivity, and specificity. Deep learning models using SegNet, U-Net, and an FCN achieved average segmentation accuracies of 95.8%, 95.1%, and 97.6%, respectively, compared to PLDT (91.4%) and Otsu’s thresholding (72.6%). Thus we conclude that an FCN outperforms other deep learning and conventional techniques when segmenting femur bone from soft tissue in DXA images. Accurate femur segmentation improves bone mineral density computation, which in turn enhances the diagnosing of osteoporosis.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Advanced X-ray and CT Imaging · Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging · Bone health and osteoporosis research

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (45)

Show source-provided references
1. Femur neck geometry and radiographic signs of osteoporosis as predictors of hip fracture10.1016/8756-3282(96)00004-X ↗
2. Diagnosis of osteoporosis and assessment of fracture risk10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08761-5 ↗
3. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry for measurement of phalangeal bone mineral density on a slot-scanning digital radiography system10.1109/TBME.2015.2447575 ↗
4. Impact of anomalous vertebral segmentation on measurements of bone mineral density10.1002/jbmr.5650080610 ↗
5. Automatic segmentation of Femur bones in anterior-posterior pelvis X-ray images
6. A comparison of X-ray image segmentation techniques10.4316/AECE.2013.03014 ↗
7. Use of DXA-based finite element analysis of the proximal Femur in a longitudinal study of hip fracture10.1002/jbmr.1856 ↗
8. Manual segmentation of DXA scan images results in reliable upper and lower extremity soft and rigid tissue mass estimates10.1016/j.jbiomech.2009.02.017 ↗
9. Assessment of bone mass by image analysis of metacarpal bone roentgenograms: A quantitative digital image processing (DIP) method
10. Metacarpal bone mass in normal and osteoporotic Japanese women using computed X-ray densitometry10.1007/BF00299308 ↗
11. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry-based body volume measurement for 4-compartment body composition10.3945/ajcn.111.019273 ↗
12. Quantitative vertebral fracture detection on DXA images using shape and appearance models10.1016/j.acra.2007.06.012 ↗
13. Statistical shape and appearance models of bones10.1016/j.bone.2013.12.006 ↗
14. Robust X-ray image segmentation by spectral clustering and active shape model10.1117/1.JMI.3.3.034005 ↗
15. Current methods in medical image segmentation10.1146/annurev.bioeng.2.1.315 ↗
16. A note on the marker-based watershed method for X-ray image segmentation10.1016/j.cmpb.2017.01.014 ↗
17. D. Ciresan, A. Giusti, L. M. Gambardella and J. Schmidhuber, “Mitosis detection in breast cancer histology images with deep neural networks,” in Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Interventions (MICCAI 2013), Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 411–418, 2013.10.1007/978-3-642-40763-5_51 ↗
18. Classification of mitotic figures with convolutional neural networks and seeded blob features10.4103/2153-3539.112694 ↗
19. Automatic detection of invasive ductal carcinoma in whole slide images with convolutional neural networks10.1117/12.2043872 ↗
20. A deep learning architecture for image representation visual interpretability and automated basal-cell carcinoma cancer detection
21. D. Ciresan, A. Giusti, L. Gambardella and J. Schmidhuber, “Deep neural networks segment neuronal membranes in electron microscopy images,” in Proc. of the 25th Int. Conf. on Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS 2012), Curran Associates Inc., 57 Morehouse Lane, Red Hook, NY, USA, vol. 2, pp. 2843–2851, 2012.
22. T. J. Brinker, A. Hekler, J. S. Utikal, N. Grabe, D. Schadendorf et al., “Skin cancer classification using convolutional neural networks: systematic review,” Journal of Medical Internet Research, vol. 20, no. 10, pp. 1–8, 2018.10.2196/11936 ↗
23. Chen · 5th Int. Workshop on Machine Learning in Medical Imaging (MLMI’14) · 2014 · 1710.1007/978-3-319-10581-9_3 ↗
24. N. Dhungel, G. Carneiro and A. P. Bradley, “Deep learning and structured prediction for the segmentation of mass in mammograms,” in Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention (MICCAI 2015), Springer, Cham, Munich, Germany, pp. 605–612, 2015.10.1007/978-3-319-24553-9_74 ↗
25. N.Dhungel, G.Carneiro and A. P.Bradley, “Deep structured learning for mass segmentation from mammograms,” 2014. [online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/.10.1109/ICIP.2015.7351343 ↗
26. X. L. Yang, S. Y. Yeo, J. M. Hong, S. T. Wong, W. T. Tang et al., “A deep learning approach for tumor tissue image classification,” in Proc. of Biomedical Engineering, Innsbruck, Austria, ACTA Press, pp. 1–7, 2016.10.2316/P.2016.832-025 ↗
27. J. Long, E. Shelhamer and T. Darrell, “Fully convolutional networks for semantic segmentation,” in Proc. of the IEEE Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 3431–3440, 2015.10.1109/CVPR.2015.7298965 ↗
28. Lung CT image segmentation using deep neural networks10.1016/j.procs.2018.01.104 ↗
29. Y. Jia, E. Shelhamer, J. Donahue, S. Karayev, J. Long et al., “Caffe: Convolutional architecture for fast feature embedding,” in Proc. of the 22nd ACM Int. Conf. on Multimedia, Orlando, Florida, USA, ACM, pp. 675–678, 2014.10.1145/2647868.2654889 ↗
30. Deep convolutional neural networks for computer-aided detection: CNN architectures, dataset characteristics and transfer learning10.1109/TMI.2016.2528162 ↗
31. Deep convolutional neural networks for automatic segmentation of left ventricle cavity from cardiac magnetic resonance images10.1049/iet-cvi.2016.0482 ↗
32. A fully convolutional neural network for cardiac segmentation in short-axis MRI
33. Femur segmentation in DXA imaging using a machine learning decision tree10.3233/XST-180399 ↗
34. Denoising images of dual energy X-ray absorptiometry using non-local means filters10.3233/XST-17341 ↗
35. M. A. Al-Antari, M. A. Al-Masni, M. Metwally, D. Hussain, E. Valarezo et al., “Non-local means filter denoising for DXA images,” in 2017 39th Annual Int. Conf. of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), Jeju Island, S. Korea, pp. 572–575, 2017.10.1109/EMBC.2017.8036889 ↗
36. Automatic hip geometric feature extraction in DXA imaging using regional random forest10.3233/XST-180434 ↗
37. Computer-aided osteoporosis detection from DXA imaging10.1016/j.cmpb.2019.03.011 ↗
38. S. Dodge and L. Karam, “Understanding how image quality affects deep neural networks,” in IEEE, 2016 Eighth Int. Conf. on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX), Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 1–6, 2016.10.1109/QoMEX.2016.7498955 ↗
39. Assessing the impact of the deceived non-local means filter as a preprocessing stage in a convolutional neural network based approach for age estimation using digital hand x-Ray images
40. G. B. P. da Costa ,W. A. Contato, T. S. Nazare, J. E. S. B. Neto and M. Ponti, “An empirical study on the effects of different types of noise in image classification tasks,” Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 1–6, 2016.
41. Kaur · Advanced Informatics for Computing Research · 2017 · 18510.1007/978-981-10-5780-9_17 ↗
42. A. Krizhevsky, I. Sutskever and G. E. Hinton, “Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Harrahs and Harveys, Lake Tahoe, NeurIPS, pp. 1097–1105, 2012.
43. Fully convolutional networks for semantic segmentation10.1109/TPAMI.2016.2572683 ↗
44. O. Ronneberger, P. Fischer and T. Brox, “U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation,” in Int. Conf. on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, Munich, Germany, pp. 234–241, 2015.10.1007/978-3-319-24574-4_28 ↗
45. Segnet: A deep convolutional encoder-decoder architecture for image segmentation10.1109/TPAMI.2016.2644615 ↗