Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35830745›Full record

ArticleMedical image analysis2022

Object recognition in medical images via anatomy-guided deep learning.

Chao Jin, Jayaram K Udupa, Liming Zhao, Yubing Tong, Dewey Odhner, Gargi Pednekar, Sanghita Nag, Sharon Lewis, Nicholas Poole, Sutirth Mannikeri and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical image analysis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Anatomically ROI- and IOI-informed Hybrid U-Net model for Abdominal Object Segmentation in CT images.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2025
    Article
  9. Weakly Supervised Deep Learning for Monitoring Sleep Apnea Severity Using Coarse-grained Labels.IEEE transactions on automation science and engineering : a publication of the IEEE Robotics and Automation Society · 2025
    Article
  10. Optimal strategies for modeling anatomy in a hybrid intelligence framework for auto-segmentation of organs.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2024
    Article
  11. Anatomic attention regions via optimal anatomy modeling and recognition for DL-based image segmentation.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Auto-segmentation of thoraco-abdominal organs in free breathing pediatric dynamic MRI.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2023
    Article
  15. Auto-segmentation of thoracic brachial plexuses for radiation therapy planning.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2023
    Article
  16. On the Analyses of Medical Images Using Traditional Machine Learning Techniques and Convolutional Neural Networks.Archives of computational methods in engineering : state of the art reviews · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chao JinMedical Image Processing Group, 602 Goddard building, 3710 Hamilton Walk, Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States.
Jayaram K UdupaMedical Image Processing Group, 602 Goddard building, 3710 Hamilton Walk, Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States. Electronic address: jay@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.
Liming ZhaoMedical Image Processing Group, 602 Goddard building, 3710 Hamilton Walk, Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States.
Yubing TongMedical Image Processing Group, 602 Goddard building, 3710 Hamilton Walk, Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States.
Dewey OdhnerMedical Image Processing Group, 602 Goddard building, 3710 Hamilton Walk, Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States.
Gargi PednekarQuantitative Radiology Solutions, LLC, 3675 Market Street, Suite 200, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States.
Sanghita NagQuantitative Radiology Solutions, LLC, 3675 Market Street, Suite 200, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States.
Sharon LewisQuantitative Radiology Solutions, LLC, 3675 Market Street, Suite 200, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States.
Nicholas PooleMedical Image Processing Group, 602 Goddard building, 3710 Hamilton Walk, Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States.
Sutirth MannikeriMedical Image Processing Group, 602 Goddard building, 3710 Hamilton Walk, Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States.
Sudarshana GovindasamyMedical Image Processing Group, 602 Goddard building, 3710 Hamilton Walk, Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States.
Aarushi SinghMedical Image Processing Group, 602 Goddard building, 3710 Hamilton Walk, Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States.
Joe CamarattaQuantitative Radiology Solutions, LLC, 3675 Market Street, Suite 200, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States.
Steve OwensQuantitative Radiology Solutions, LLC, 3675 Market Street, Suite 200, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States.
Drew A TorigianMedical Image Processing Group, 602 Goddard building, 3710 Hamilton Walk, Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, United States.
University of Pennsylvania · USRadiology Associates · US

Funding

Models and methods for automatically measuring disease body-wide and staging disease via FDG-PET/CT in LymphomaR01CA255748 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI SCHUSTER, STEPHEN J, TORIGIAN, DREW · 2021 to 2024
$2.3M
Automated Object Contouring Methods & Software for Radiotherapy PlanningR42CA199735 · NCI · QUANTITATIVE RADIOLOGY SOLUTIONS, LLC · PI OWENS, STEVE, UDUPA, JAYARAM K · 2018 to 2020
$1.9M
Automated Object Contouring Methods & Software for Thoracic Radiotherapy PlanningR41CA199735 · NCI · QUANTITATIVE RADIOLOGY SOLUTIONS, LLC · PI UDUPA, JAYARAM K · 2016 to 2016
$254k
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA255748NCI NIH HHS R41 CA199735NCI NIH HHS R42 CA199735
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDespite advances in deep learning, robust medical image segmentation in the presence of artifacts, pathology, and other imaging shortcomings has remained a challenge. In this paper, we demonstrate that by synergistically marrying the unmatched strengths of high-level human knowledge (i.e., natural intelligence (NI)) with the capabilities of deep learning (DL) networks (i.e., artificial intelligence (AI)) in garnering intricate details, these challenges can be significantly overcome. Focusing on the object recognition task, we formulate an anatomy-guided deep learning object recognition approach named AAR-DL which combines an advanced anatomy-modeling strategy, model-based non-deep-learning object recognition, and deep learning object detection networks to achieve expert human-like performance.

methodsThe AAR-DL approach consists of 4 key modules wherein prior knowledge (NI) is made use of judiciously at every stage. In the first module AAR-R, objects are recognized based on a previously created fuzzy anatomy model of the body region with all its organs following the automatic anatomy recognition (AAR) approach wherein high-level human anatomic knowledge is precisely codified. This module is purely model-based with no DL involvement. Although the AAR-R operation lacks accuracy, it is robust to artifacts and deviations (much like NI), and provides the much-needed anatomic guidance in the form of rough regions-of-interest (ROIs) for the following DL modules. The 2nd module DL-R makes use of the ROI information to limit the search region to just where each object is most likely to reside and performs DL-based detection of the 2D bounding boxes (BBs) in slices. The 2D BBs hug the shape of the 3D object much better than 3D BBs and their detection is feasible only due to anatomy guidance from AAR-R. In the 3rd module, the AAR model is deformed via the found 2D BBs providing refined model information which now embodies both NI and AI decisions. The refined AAR model more actively guides the 4th refined DL-R module to perform final object detection via DL. Anatomy knowledge is made use of in designing the DL networks wherein spatially sparse objects and non-sparse objects are handled differently to provide the required level of attention for each.

resultsUtilizing 150 thoracic and 225 head and neck (H&N) computed tomography (CT) data sets of cancer patients undergoing routine radiation therapy planning, the recognition performance of the AAR-DL approach is evaluated on 10 thoracic and 16 H&N organs in comparison to pure model-based approach (AAR-R) and pure DL approach without anatomy guidance. Recognition accuracy is assessed via location error/ centroid distance error, scale or size error, and wall distance error. The results demonstrate how the errors are gradually and systematically reduced from the 1st module to the 4th module as high-level knowledge is infused via NI at various stages into the processing pipeline. This improvement is especially dramatic for sparse and artifact-prone challenging objects, achieving a location error over all objects of 4.4 mm and 4.3 mm for the two body regions, respectively. The pure DL approach failed on several very challenging sparse objects while AAR-DL achieved accurate recognition, almost matching human performance, showing the importance of anatomy guidance for robust operation. Anatomy guidance also reduces the time required for training DL networks considerably.

conclusions(i) High-level anatomy guidance improves recognition performance of DL methods. (ii) This improvement is especially noteworthy for spatially sparse, low-contrast, inconspicuous, and artifact-prone objects. (iii) Once anatomy guidance is provided, 3D objects can be detected much more accurately via 2D BBs than 3D BBs and the 2D BBs represent object containment with much more specificity. (iv) Anatomy guidance brings stability and robustness to DL approaches for object localization. (v) The training time can be greatly reduced by making use of anatomy guidance.

Indexed as

Deep LearningImage Processing, Computer-AssistedAlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceHumansTomography, X-Ray ComputedAnatomic modelsArtificial intelligenceAutomatic anatomy recognitionDeep learningNatural intelligenceOrgan recognition

Identifiers

PMID35830745
PMCPMC13681199
OpenAlexW4283514708

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.