Fast Renal Cortex Localization by Combining Generalized Hough Transform and Active Appearance Models

  • Dehui Xiang
  • Xinjian Chen
  • Chao Jin
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8198)


Automatic localization of objects is one of great important steps in object recognition and analysis, such as segmentation, registration in many medical applications. In this paper, an automated method is proposed to recognize renal cortex on contrast-enhanced abdominal CT images. The proposed method is based on a strategic combination of the Generalized Hough Transform and Active Appearance Model. It consists of two main phases: training and localization. In the training phase, we train the mean shape models of renal cortex by using Active Appearance Model and compute Generalized Hough Transform parameters. In the localization phase, a modified Generalized Hough Transform algorithm is advanced to estimate potential center of gravity for improving the conventional Active Appearance Model matching method, and then a two-pass Active Appearance Model matching method is proposed based on Generalized Hough Transform. The Active Appearance Models and Generalized Hough Transform parameters were trained with 20 CT angiography datasets, and then the proposed method was tested on a clinical data set of 17 CT angiography datasets. The experimental results show that: (1) an overall cortex localization accuracy is 0.9920±0.0038, average distance is 11.00±9.34 pixels. (2) The proposed method is highly efficient such that the overall localization can be finalized within 1.2075±0.3738 seconds for each 2D slice.


Localization kidney renal cortex generalized hough transform active appearance model 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    American Cancer Society: What are the key statistics about kidney cancer?,
  2. 2.
    Godley, P.A., Taylor, M.: Renal cell carcinoma. Current Opinion in Oncology 13(3), 199–203 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rusko, L., Bekes, G., Nemeth, G., Fidrich, M.: Fully automatic liver segmentation for contrast-enhanced ct images. In: MICCAI Wshp. 3D Segmentation in the Clinic: A Grand Challenge, vol. 2(7) (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fujimoto, H., Gu, L., Kaneko, T.: Recognition of abdominal organs using 3d mathematical morphology. Systems and Computers in Japan 33(8), 75–83 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Park, H., Bland, P.H., Meyer, C.R.: Construction of an abdominal probabilistic atlas and its application in segmentation. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 22(4), 483–492 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kass, M., Witkin, A., Terzopoulos, D.: Snakes: Active contour models. International Journal of Computer Vision 1(4), 321–331 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Frangi, A.F., Rueckert, D., Schnabel, J.A., Niessen, W.J.: Automatic construction of multiple-object three-dimensional statistical shape models: Application to cardiac modeling. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 21(9), 1151–1166 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen, X., Summers, R.M., Cho, M., Bagci, U., Yao, J.: An automatic method for renal cortex segmentation on ct images: Evaluation on kidney donors. Academic Radiology 19(5), 562–570 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen, X., Udupa, J.K., Bagci, U., Zhuge, Y., Yao, J.: Medical image segmentation by combining graph cuts and oriented active appearance models. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 21(4), 2035–2046 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shen, W., Kassim, A.A., Koh, H., Shuter, B.: Segmentation of kidney cortex in mri studies: a constrained morphological 3d h-maxima transform approach. International Journal of Medical Engineering and Informatics 1(3), 330–341 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Boykov, Y., Lee, V.S., Rusinek, H., Bansal, R.: Segmentation of dynamic N-D data sets via graph cuts using markov models. In: Niessen, W.J., Viergever, M.A. (eds.) MICCAI 2001. LNCS, vol. 2208, pp. 1058–1066. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sun, Y., Jolly, M.P., Moura, J.: Integrated registration of dynamic renal perfusion mr images. In: 2004 International Conference on Image Processing, ICIP 2004, vol. 3, pp. 1923–1926. IEEE (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zöllner, F.G., Sance, R., Rogelj, P., Ledesma-Carbayo, M.J., Rørvik, J., Santos, A., Lundervold, A.: Assessment of 3d dce-mri of the kidneys using non-rigid image registration and segmentation of voxel time courses. Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics 33(3), 171–181 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Davies, R.H., Twining, C.J., Cootes, T.F., Waterton, J.C., Taylor, C.J.: A minimum description length approach to statistical shape modeling. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 21(5), 525–537 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Khoshelham, K.: Extending generalized hough transform to detect 3d objects in laser range data. In: Proceedings of ISPRS Workshop on Laser Scanning, LS 2007, pp. 206–210 (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stegmann, M.B., Ersboll, B.K., Larsen, R.: Fame-a flexible appearance modeling environment. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 22(10), 1319–1331 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fawcett, T.: An introduction to roc analysis. Pattern Recognition Letters 27(8), 861–874 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dehui Xiang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Xinjian Chen
    • 2
  • Chao Jin
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Computer Science and TechnologySoochow UniversityJiangsuChina
  2. 2.School of Electronics and Information EngineeringSoochow UniversityJiangsuChina

Personalised recommendations