An ellipse-fitting based method for efficient registration of breast masses on two mammographic views.

When reading mammograms, radiologists routinely search for and compare suspicious breast lesions identified on two corresponding craniocaudal (CC) and mediolateral oblique (MLO) views. Automatically identifying and matching the same true-positive breast lesions depicted on two views is an important step for developing successful multiview based computer-aided detection (CAD) schemes. The authors developed a method to automatically register breast areas and detect matching strips of interest used to identify the matched mass regions depicted on CC and MLO views. The method uses an ellipse based model to fit the breast boundary contour (skin line) and set a local Cartesian coordinate system for each view. One intersection point between the major/minor axis and the fitted ellipse perimeter passed through breast boundary is selected as the origin and the majoraxis and the minoraxis of the ellipse are used as the two axis of the Cartesian coordinate system. When a mass is identified on one view, the scheme computes its position in the local coordinate system. Then, the distance is mapped onto the local coordinate of the other view. At the end of the mapped distance a registered centerline of the matching strip is created. The authors established an image database that includes 200 test examinations each depicting one verified mass visible on the two views. They tested whether the registered centerline identified on another view can be used to locate the matched mass region. The experiments show that the average distance between the mass region centers and the registered centerlines was +/- 8.3 mm and in 91% of testing cases the registered centerline actually passes through the matched mass regions. A matching strip width of 47 mm was required to achieve 100% sensitivity for the test database. The results demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed method to automatically identify masses depicted on CC and MLO views, which may improve future development of multiview based CAD schemes.

[1]  Berkman Sahiner,et al.  Improvement of computerized mass detection on mammograms: fusion of two-view information. , 2002, Medical physics.

[2]  Toshiro Kubota,et al.  Estimating Diameters of Pulmonary Nodules with Competition-Diffusion and Robust Ellipsoid Fit , 2005, CVBIA.

[3]  Nico Karssemeijer,et al.  Combining two mammographic projections in a computer aided mass detection method. , 2007, Medical physics.

[4]  Milton Abramowitz,et al.  Handbook of Mathematical Functions with Formulas, Graphs, and Mathematical Tables , 1964 .

[5]  Ronald L. Rivest,et al.  Introduction to Algorithms , 1990 .

[6]  Nico Karssemeijer,et al.  Finding corresponding regions of interest in mediolateral oblique and craniocaudal mammographic views. , 2006, Medical physics.

[7]  Luisa P. Wallace,et al.  Multiview-based computer-aided detection scheme for breast masses. , 2006, Medical physics.

[8]  Andrew W. Fitzgibbon,et al.  Direct Least Square Fitting of Ellipses , 1999, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[9]  David P. Dobkin,et al.  The quickhull algorithm for convex hulls , 1996, TOMS.

[10]  David Gur,et al.  Computer-aided detection performance in mammographic examination of masses: assessment. , 2004, Radiology.

[11]  Y H Chang,et al.  Computerized localization of breast lesions from two views. An experimental comparison of two methods. , 1999, Investigative radiology.

[12]  Robert M. Nishikawa,et al.  Current status and future directions of computer-aided diagnosis in mammography , 2007, Comput. Medical Imaging Graph..

[13]  Michael Brady,et al.  Correspondence between Different View Breast X Rays Using Curved Epipolar Lines , 2001, Comput. Vis. Image Underst..

[14]  M L Giger,et al.  Computerized detection of masses in digital mammograms: analysis of bilateral subtraction images. , 1991, Medical physics.

[15]  B Sahiner,et al.  A regional registration technique for automated interval change analysis of breast lesions on mammograms. , 1999, Medical physics.

[16]  M Kallergi,et al.  Evaluating the performance of detection algorithms in digital mammography. , 1999, Medical physics.

[17]  Yulei Jiang,et al.  Effect of correlation on combining diagnostic information from two images of the same patient. , 2005, Medical physics.

[18]  S. Duffy,et al.  The value of the second view in screening mammography. , 1996, The British journal of radiology.

[19]  L V Ackerman,et al.  Computer screening of xeromammograms: a technique for defining suspicious areas of the breast. , 1979, Computers and biomedical research, an international journal.

[20]  Geoffrey McLennan,et al.  The Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC): pulmonary nodule measurements, the variation, and the difference between different size metrics , 2007, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[21]  L. Tabár,et al.  One- versus Two-View Mammography Screening , 1994, Acta radiologica.

[22]  Paul F. Whelan,et al.  The use of 3D surface fitting for robust polyp detection and classification in CT colonography , 2006, Comput. Medical Imaging Graph..

[23]  David Gur,et al.  Computer-aided detection schemes: the effect of limiting the number of cued regions in each case. , 2004, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.