对比7种方法发现:简单两阶段法比复杂专用模型更优,适合加速MRI分割。
Understanding Benefits and Pitfalls of Current Methods for the Segmentation of Undersampled MRI Data
- 分两阶段处理:先重建后分割,加入数据一致性约束
- 在两个真实数据集上,两阶段法分割准确率更高
- 首次统一评测,揭示复杂模型未必优于简单流程
MRI是无创观察人体解剖与病灶的宝贵工具,但采集耗时,导致患者不适和医疗成本上升。近年来研究致力于加速MRI采集,同时保持图像质量接近全采样。然而,对许多下游任务如分割而言,完美重建并非必需。这促使研究者直接在欠采样MRI数据上进行分割。尽管已有进展,现有方法多独立发展,缺乏统一评估标准,且使用不同或私有数据集。本文首次提供针对欠采样MRI分割的统一基准,比较了7种方法。重点关注将重建与分割结合的一阶段方法,与先用成熟重建技术再接分割网络的两阶段方法。实验基于包含多线圈k空间数据及人工标注分割真值的两个数据集。结果表明:考虑数据一致性的简单两阶段方法,在分割性能上超越了专为该任务设计的复杂一阶段方法。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
MR imaging is a valuable diagnostic tool allowing to non-invasively visualize patient anatomy and pathology with high soft-tissue contrast. However, MRI acquisition is typically time-consuming, leading to patient discomfort and increased costs to the healthcare system. Recent years have seen substantial research effort into the development of methods that allow for accelerated MRI acquisition while still obtaining a reconstruction that appears similar to the fully-sampled MR image. However, for many applications a perfectly reconstructed MR image may not be necessary, particularly, when the primary goal is a downstream task such as segmentation. This has led to growing interest in methods that aim to perform segmentation directly on accelerated MRI data. Despite recent advances, existing methods have largely been developed in isolation, without direct comparison to one another, often using separate or private datasets, and lacking unified evaluation standards. To date, no high-quality, comprehensive comparison of these methods exists, and the optimal strategy for segmenting accelerated MR data remains unknown. This paper provides the first unified benchmark for the segmentation of undersampled MRI data comparing 7 approaches. A particular focus is placed on comparing \textit{one-stage approaches}, that combine reconstruction and segmentation into a unified model, with \textit{two-stage approaches}, that utilize established MRI reconstruction methods followed by a segmentation network. We test these methods on two MRI datasets that include multi-coil k-space data as well as a human-annotated segmentation ground-truth. We find that simple two-stage methods that consider data-consistency lead to the best segmentation scores, surpassing complex specialized methods that are developed specifically for this task.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。