论文标题
跨直直直直径图像中前列腺分割的域概括:一项多中心研究
Domain Generalization for Prostate Segmentation in Transrectal Ultrasound Images: A Multi-center Study
论文作者
论文摘要
前列腺活检和图像引导的治疗程序通常在与磁共振图像(MRI)融合的超声指导下进行。准确的图像融合依赖于超声图像上前列腺的准确分割。然而,超声图像中降低的信噪比和工件(例如,斑点和阴影)限制了自动前列腺分割技术的性能,并将这些方法推广到新的图像域是本质上困难的。在这项研究中,我们通过引入一种新型的2.5D深神经网络来解决这些挑战,以在超声图像上进行前列腺分割。我们的方法通过组合有监督的域适应技术和知识蒸馏损失,解决了转移学习和填充方法的局限性(即,在更新模型权重时,在更新模型权重时的性能下降)。知识蒸馏损失允许在新数据集上的模型填充后保留先前学习的知识并降低性能下降。此外,我们的方法依赖于注意模块,该模块认为模型特征定位信息以提高分割精度。我们对一个机构的764名受试者进行了培训,并仅使用后续机构的十个主题对我们的模型进行了填补。我们分析了我们在三个不同机构的2067名受试者的三个大数据集上分析了我们的方法的性能。我们的方法达到了平均骰子相似性系数(骰子)为$ 94.0 \ pm0.03 $,而Hausdorff距离(HD95)为2.28 $ mm $,在第一机构的独立受试者中。此外,我们的模型在其他两个机构的研究中都很好地广泛化(骰子:$ 91.0 \ pm0.03 $; hd95:3.7 $ mm $和骰子:$ 82.0 \ pm0.03 $; hd95 $; hd95:7.1 $ mm $)。
Prostate biopsy and image-guided treatment procedures are often performed under the guidance of ultrasound fused with magnetic resonance images (MRI). Accurate image fusion relies on accurate segmentation of the prostate on ultrasound images. Yet, the reduced signal-to-noise ratio and artifacts (e.g., speckle and shadowing) in ultrasound images limit the performance of automated prostate segmentation techniques and generalizing these methods to new image domains is inherently difficult. In this study, we address these challenges by introducing a novel 2.5D deep neural network for prostate segmentation on ultrasound images. Our approach addresses the limitations of transfer learning and finetuning methods (i.e., drop in performance on the original training data when the model weights are updated) by combining a supervised domain adaptation technique and a knowledge distillation loss. The knowledge distillation loss allows the preservation of previously learned knowledge and reduces the performance drop after model finetuning on new datasets. Furthermore, our approach relies on an attention module that considers model feature positioning information to improve the segmentation accuracy. We trained our model on 764 subjects from one institution and finetuned our model using only ten subjects from subsequent institutions. We analyzed the performance of our method on three large datasets encompassing 2067 subjects from three different institutions. Our method achieved an average Dice Similarity Coefficient (Dice) of $94.0\pm0.03$ and Hausdorff Distance (HD95) of 2.28 $mm$ in an independent set of subjects from the first institution. Moreover, our model generalized well in the studies from the other two institutions (Dice: $91.0\pm0.03$; HD95: 3.7$mm$ and Dice: $82.0\pm0.03$; HD95: 7.1 $mm$).