Advertisement

Proximity constraints in deformable models for cortical surface identification

  • David MacDonaldEmail author
  • David Avis
  • Alan C. Evans
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1496)

Abstract

Automatic computer processing of large multi-dimensional images such as those produced by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is greatly aided by deformable models. A general method of deforming polyhedra is presented here, with two novel features. Firstly, explicit prevention of non-simple (self-intersecting) surface geometries is provided, unlike conventional deformable models which merely discourage such behaviour. Secondly, simultaneous deformation of multiple surfaces with inter-surface proximity constraints provides a greater facility for incorporating model-based constraints into the process of image recognition. These two features are used advantageously to automatically identify the total surface of the cerebral cortical gray matter from normal human MR images, accurately locating the depths of the sulci even where under-sampling in the image obscures the visibility of sulci. A large number of individual surfaces (N=151) are created and a spatial map of the mean and standard deviation of the cerebral cortex and the thickness of cortical gray matter are generated. Ideas for further work are outlined.

Keywords

Image Segmentation Surface Deformation Cerebral Cortex 

References

  1. 1.
    M. Kass, A. Witkin, and D. Terzopoulos, “Snakes: Active contour models,” International Journal of Computer Vision, pp. 321–331, 1988.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. Collins, T. Peters, W. Dai, and A. Evans, “Model-based segmentation of individual brain structures from mri data,” in Proceedings Visualization in Biomedical Computing 1992, pp. 10–23, 1992.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    C. Davatzikos and R. N. Bryan, “Using a deformable surface model to obtain a shape representation of the cortex,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision 1995, pp. 212–217, 1995.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    S. Sandor and R. Leahy, “Surface-based labeling of cortical anatomy using a deformable atlas,” IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, vol. 16, pp. 41–54, Feb 1997.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    L. D. Cohen and I. Cohen, “Finite-element methods for active contour models and balloons for 2-d and 3-d images,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 15, pp. 1131–1147, Nov 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    L. Staib and J. Duncan, “Deformable fourier models for surface finding in 3d images,” in Proceedings Visualization in Biomedical Computing 1992, pp. 90–104, 1992.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    T. McInerney and D. Terzopoulos, “Deformable models in medical image analysis: a survey,” Medical Image Analysis, vol. 1, no. 2, 1996.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Vaillant, C. Davatzikos, and N. R. Bryan, “Finding 3d parametric representations of the deep cortical folds,” Proceedings of the Workship on Mathematical Methods in Biomedical Image Analysis 1996, pp. 151–159.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    A. M. Dale and M. I. Sereno, “Improved localization of cortical activity by combining eeg and meg with mri cortical surface reconstruction: a linear approach,” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, vol. 5, pp. 162–176, 1993.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. G. Sled, A. P. Zijdenbos, and A. C. Evans, “A comparison of retrospective intensity non-uniformity correction methods for MRI,” in Information Processing in Medical Imaging, 1997. in press.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    D. Collins, P. Neelin, T. Peters, and A. Evans, “Automatic 3d intersubject registration of mr volumetric data in standardized talairach space,” Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography, vol. 18, pp. 192–205, Mar. 1994.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    R. Bajcsy and K. Cič, “Multiresolution elastic matching,” Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing, vol. 46, pp. 1–21, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    C. Nastar and N. Ayache, “Non-rigid motion analysis in medical images: a physically based approach,” in Proceedings of Information Processing in Medical Imaging, (Flagstaff, Arizona), pp. 17–32, June 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.McConnell Brain Imaging Centre, Montréal Neurological InstituteMcGill UniversityMontréalCanada

Personalised recommendations