Atlas-based segmentation of temporal bone surface structures
- 72 Downloads
To develop a time-efficient automated segmentation approach that could identify surface structures on the temporal bone for use in surgical simulation software and preoperative surgical training.
An atlas-based segmentation approach was developed to segment the tegmen, sigmoid sulcus, exterior auditory canal, interior auditory canal, and posterior canal wall in normal temporal bone CT images. This approach was tested in images of 20 cadaver bones (10 left, 10 right). The results of the automated segmentation were compared to manual segmentation using quantitative metrics of similarity, Mahalanobis distance, average Hausdorff distance, and volume similarity.
The Mahalanobis distance was less than 0.232 mm for all structures. The average Hausdorff distance was less than 0.464 mm for all structures except the posterior canal wall and external auditory canal for the right bones. Volume similarity was 0.80 or greater for all structures except the sigmoid sulcus that was 0.75 for both left and right bones. Visually, the segmented structures were accurate and similar to that manually traced by an expert observer.
An atlas-based approach using a deformable registration of a Gaussian-smoothed temporal bone image and refinements using surface landmarks was successful in segmenting surface structures of temporal bone anatomy for use in pre-surgical planning and training.
KeywordsAtlas-based segmentation Image registration Surgical simulation Pre-surgical planning Temporal bone anatomy
This research was supported by NIDCD/NIH 1R01-DC011321 and by funding from Nationwide Children’s Hospital, Columbus, OH.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Ohio State University Institutional Review Board and have been performed in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
This study was funded by NIDCD/NIH 1R01-DC011321.
- 3.Shamonin DP, Bron EE, Lelieveldt BPF, Smits M, Klein S, Staring M (2014) Fast parallel image registration on CPU and GPU for diagnostic classification of Alzheimer’s disease. Front Neuroinformatics 7:1–15Google Scholar
- 4.Klein S, Staring M (2014) Elastix the manual (http://elastix.isi.uu.nl/)
- 5.Liao PS, Chen TS, Chung PC (2001) A fast algorithm for multilevel thresholding. J Inf Sci Eng 17:713–727Google Scholar
- 7.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore_neighborhood. Accessed 29 Jan 2019
- 8.Gonzalez RC, Woods RE (2008) Digital image processing. Pearson Prentice Hall Inc, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
- 9.Taha AA, Hanbury A (2015) Metrics for evaluating 3D medical image segmentation: analysis, selection, and tool. BMC Med Imaging 15(29):1–28Google Scholar
- 11.Wiet G, Hittle B, Kerwin T, Stredney D (2012) Translating surgical metrics into automated assessments. Stud Health Technol Inform 173:543–548Google Scholar