Ischemic Stroke Detection System with a Computer-Aided Diagnostic Ability Using an Unsupervised Feature Perception Enhancement Method

We propose an ischemic stroke detection system with a computer-aided diagnostic ability using a four-step unsupervised feature perception enhancement method. In the first step, known as preprocessing, we use a cubic curve contrast enhancement method to enhance image contrast. In the second step, we...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International Journal of Biomedical Imaging 2014-01, Vol.2014 (2014), p.z1-12
Hauptverfasser: Lee, Ming-Sian, Kuo, Yu-Liang, Chin, Chiun-Li, Wu, Ming-Chi, Tyan, Yeu-Sheng, Chang, Hao-Yan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:We propose an ischemic stroke detection system with a computer-aided diagnostic ability using a four-step unsupervised feature perception enhancement method. In the first step, known as preprocessing, we use a cubic curve contrast enhancement method to enhance image contrast. In the second step, we use a series of methods to extract the brain tissue image area identified during preprocessing. To detect abnormal regions in the brain images, we propose using an unsupervised region growing algorithm to segment the brain tissue area. The brain is centered on a horizontal line and the white matter of the brain’s inner ring is split into eight regions. In the third step, we use a coinciding regional location method to find the hybrid area of locations where a stroke may have occurred in each cerebral hemisphere. Finally, we make corrections and mark the stroke area with red color. In the experiment, we tested the system on 90 computed tomography (CT) images from 26 patients, and, with the assistance of two radiologists, we proved that our proposed system has computer-aided diagnostic capabilities. Our results show an increased stroke diagnosis sensitivity of 83% in comparison to 31% when radiologists use conventional diagnostic images.
ISSN:1687-4188
1687-4196
DOI:10.1155/2014/947539