Kidney segmentation in ultrasound, magnetic resonance and computed tomography images: a systematic review

dc.contributor.authorTorres, Helena Daniela Ribeiropor
dc.contributor.authorQueirós, Sandro Filipe Monteiropor
dc.contributor.authorMorais, Pedro André Gonçalvespor
dc.contributor.authorOliveira, Brunopor
dc.contributor.authorFonseca, Jaime C.por
dc.contributor.authorVilaça, João L.por
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-19T15:20:55Z
dc.date.issued2018-04
dc.description.abstractBackground and objective: Segmentation is an essential step in computer-aided diagnosis and treatment planning of kidney diseases. In recent years, several researchers proposed multiple techniques to segment the kidney in medical images from distinct imaging acquisition systems, namely ultrasound, magnetic resonance, and computed tomography. This article aims to present a systematic review of the different methodologies developed for kidney segmentation. Methods: With this work, it is intended to analyze and categorize the different kidney segmentation algorithms, establishing a comparison between them and discussing the most appropriate methods for each modality. For that, articles published between 2010 and 2016 were analyzed. The search was performed in Scopus and Web of Science using the expressions “kidney segmentation” and “renal segmentation”. Results: A total of 1528 articles were retrieved from the databases, and 95 articles were selected for this review. After analysis of the selected articles, the reviewed segmentation techniques were categorized according to their theoretical approach. Conclusions: Based on the performed analysis, it was possible to identify segmentation approaches based on distinct image processing classes that can be used to accurately segment the kidney in images of different imaging modalities. Nevertheless, further research on kidney segmentation must be conducted to overcome the current drawbacks of the state-of-the-art methods. Moreover, a standardization of the evaluation database and metrics is needed to allow a direct comparison between methods.por
dc.description.publicationversioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionpor
dc.description.sponsorshipThis work was funded by projects NORTE-01-0145-FEDER000013, and NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-024300, supported by Northern Portugal Regional Operational Programme (Norte2020), under the Portugal 2020 Partnership Agreement, through the European Regional Development Fund (FEDER), and also been funded by FEDER funds, through Competitiveness Factors Operational Programme (COMPETE), and by national funds, through the FCT— Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, under the scope of the project POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007038. The authors acknowledge FCT—Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, Portugal, and the European Social Found, European Union, for funding support through the Programa Operacional Capital Humano (POCH) in the scope of the PhD grants SFRH/BD/93443/2013 (S. Queirós) and SFRH/BD/95438/2013 (P. Morais).por
dc.distributioninternationalpor
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.cmpb.2018.01.014por
dc.identifier.eissn1872-7565por
dc.identifier.issn0169-2607por
dc.identifier.pmid29477435por
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1822/52829
dc.language.isoengpor
dc.peerreviewedyespor
dc.publisherElsevierpor
dc.relation.publisherversionwww.elsevier.com/locate/cmpbpor
dc.rightsclosedAccesspor
dc.subjectComputed tomographypor
dc.subjectKidney segmentationpor
dc.subjectMagnetic resonance imagingpor
dc.subjectSystematic reviewpor
dc.subjectUltrasound imagingpor
dc.subject.fosEngenharia e Tecnologia::Engenharia Médicapor
dc.subject.wosScience & Technologypor
dc.titleKidney segmentation in ultrasound, magnetic resonance and computed tomography images: a systematic reviewpor
dc.typearticlepor
dspace.entity.typePublicationen
oaire.citationEndPage67por
oaire.citationStartPage49por
oaire.citationVolume157por
rcaap.embargofctAssinado o copyrightpor
sdum.journalComputer Methods and Programs in Biomedicinepor

Ficheiros

Pacote original

A mostrar 1 - 1 de 1
A carregar...
Nome:
HTorres_CMPB_2018.pdf
Tamanho:
3.21 MB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format