Comparison of Improved Semi-Automated Segmentation Technique with Manual Segmentation: Data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative

Manual segmentation is the standard procedure in osteoarthritis study. However, this method is infamous for being excessive, time consuming and exhaustive. In this study, we overcame the problem of excessive expert interaction reported in manual segmentation by developing a semi-automated random walks technique with computer-aided labelling system. To minimize expert interaction, non-cartilage seeds were generated by using computer. Then, random walks algorithm would segment knee cartilage based on cartilage seeds and non-cartilage seeds. Finally, segmentation results were revised and refined accordingly. A total of 15 normal images and 10 osteoarthritic images were used in this study. In term of efficiency, we have reduced the processing time to segment normal cartilage by 47.5% (93±21s; P = 0.0000019) for observer 1 and 44% (61±8s; P = 3.52±10-5) for observer 2. We also reduced the processing time to segment diseased cartilage by 48.1% (56±16s; P = 0.00014) for observer 1 and 30.3% (62±14s; P = 0.0070) for observer 2. Besides, the proposed technique have produced good reproducibility in both normal (0.83±0.028 for observer 1 and 0.80±0.040 for observer 2) and diseased (0.80±0.060 for observer 1 and 0.82±0.043 for observer 2) cartilage segmentations. In conclusion, the combination of computer generated seeds and user-friendly random walks method have reduced the amount of expert interaction to necessary level without compromising the accuracy of results.

[1]  Marie-Pierre Jolly,et al.  Interactive Graph Cuts for Optimal Boundary and Region Segmentation of Objects in N-D Images , 2001, ICCV.

[2]  R. Loeser,et al.  Why is osteoarthritis an age-related disease? , 2010, Best practice & research. Clinical rheumatology.

[3]  M. A. Abdul Kadir,et al.  Multilabel graph based approach for knee cartilage segmentation: Data from the osteoarthritis initiative , 2014, 2014 IEEE Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Sciences (IECBES).

[4]  T Stammberger,et al.  Interobserver reproducibility of quantitative cartilage measurements: comparison of B-spline snakes and manual segmentation. , 1999, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[5]  K. Bae,et al.  Intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of volume measurement of knee cartilage segmented from the OAI MR image set using a novel semi-automated segmentation method. , 2009, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[6]  Ole Fogh Olsen,et al.  Segmenting Articular Cartilage Automatically Using a Voxel Classification Approach , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[7]  Khairil Amir Sayuti,et al.  Interactive knee cartilage extraction using efficient segmentation software: data from the osteoarthritis initiative. , 2014, Bio-medical materials and engineering.

[8]  C. Kwoh,et al.  Knee cartilage: efficient and reproducible segmentation on high-spatial-resolution MR images with the semiautomated graph-cut algorithm method. , 2009, Radiology.

[9]  Erika Schneider,et al.  The osteoarthritis initiative: report on the design rationale for the magnetic resonance imaging protocol for the knee. , 2008, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[10]  Rochelle P. Walensky,et al.  Impact of Obesity and Knee Osteoarthritis on Morbidity and Mortality in Older Americans , 2011, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[11]  Andrew J Wheaton,et al.  Cartilage volume quantification via Live Wire segmentation. , 2004, Academic radiology.

[12]  Demetri Terzopoulos,et al.  Snakes: Active contour models , 2004, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[13]  J. Sokolove,et al.  Role of inflammation in the pathogenesis of osteoarthritis: latest findings and interpretations , 2013, Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease.

[14]  Changhai Ding,et al.  Use magnetic resonance imaging to assess articular cartilage , 2012, Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease.

[15]  F Eckstein,et al.  Double echo steady state magnetic resonance imaging of knee articular cartilage at 3 Tesla: a pilot study for the Osteoarthritis Initiative , 2005, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[16]  Hai Fang,et al.  Insurer and out-of-pocket costs of osteoarthritis in the US: evidence from national survey data. , 2009, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[17]  T. Spector,et al.  The genetic predisposition to osteoarthritis , 2009 .

[18]  Khairil Amir Sayuti,et al.  Interactive medical image segmentation with seed precomputation system: Data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative , 2014, 2014 IEEE Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Sciences (IECBES).

[19]  C J Taylor,et al.  The use of active shape models for making thickness measurements of articular cartilage from MR images , 1997, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[20]  Leo Grady,et al.  Random Walks for Image Segmentation , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[21]  Sharmila Majumdar,et al.  Atlas‐based knee cartilage assessment , 2011, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[22]  E. Casey,et al.  Role of Sex Hormones in the Development of Osteoarthritis , 2012, PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation.