Next Article in Journal
A Cartesian Genetic Programming Based Parallel Neuroevolutionary Model for Cloud Server’s CPU Usage Prediction
Previous Article in Journal
Spectral Analysis of Stationary Signals Based on Two Simplified Arrangements of Chirp Transform Spectrometer
Previous Article in Special Issue
Automated Volume Status Assessment Using Inferior Vena Cava Pulsatility
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

Biomedical Image Processing and Classification

Mathematical Biology and Physiology, Department of Electronics and Telecommunications, Politecnico di Torino, 10129 Turin, Italy
Electronics 2021, 10(1), 66; https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10010066
Submission received: 30 November 2020 / Accepted: 14 December 2020 / Published: 1 January 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biomedical Image Processing and Classification)

1. Introduction

Biomedical image processing is an interdisciplinary field [1] that spreads its foundations throughout a variety of disciplines, including electronic engineering, computer science, physics, mathematics, physiology, and medicine. Several imaging techniques have been developed [2], providing many approaches to the study of the body, including X-rays for computed tomography, ultrasounds, magnetic resonance, radioactive pharmaceuticals used in nuclear medicine (for positron emission tomography and single-photon emission computed tomography), elastography, functional near-infrared spectroscopy, endoscopy, photoacoustic imaging, and thermography. Even bioelectric sensors, when using high-density systems sampling a two dimensional surface (e.g., in electroencephalography or electromyography [3]), can provide data that can be studied by image processing methods. Biomedical image processing is finding an increasing number of important applications, for example, to make image segmentation of an organ to study its internal structure and to support the diagnosis of a disease or the selection of a treatment [4].
Classification theory is another well developed field of research [5] connected to machine learning, which is an important branch of artificial intelligence. Different problems have been addressed, from the supervised identification of a map relating input features to a desired output, to the exploration of data by unsupervised learning (cluster analysis, data mining) or online training through experience. The estimation of informative features and their further processing (by feature generation) and selection (either by filtering or with approaches wrapped to the classifier) are important steps, both to improve classification performance (avoiding overfitting) and to investigate the information provided by candidate features to the output of interest. Excellent results have also been recently documented by deep learning approaches [6], in which optimal features are automatically extracted in deep layers on the basis of training examples and then used for classification.
When classification methods are associated with image processing, computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) systems can be developed, e.g., for the identification of diseased tissue [7] or a specific lesion or malformation [4]. These results indicate interesting future prospects in supporting the diagnosis of diseases [8].

2. This Special Issue

The present issue consists of six papers on a few topics in the wide range of research fields covered by biomedical image processing and classification.
In [9], the authors have proposed a CAD system for identification and assessment of glomeruli from kidney tissue slides. Their approach is based on deep learning, exploiting convolutional neural network (CNN) architectures tailored for the semantic segmentation task. The obtained results are promising, as also stated by expert pathologists. Moreover, the proposed system can easily be integrated into the existing pathologists’ workflow thanks to an XML interface with Aperio ImageScope [10].
With the recent advances of techniques in digitalized scanning, tissue histopathology slides can be stored in the form of digital images [11]. In recent years, many efforts have been devoted to developing automated classification and segmentation techniques with the aim of improving accuracy and efficiency in digital pathology [12]. In kidney transplantations, pathologists evaluate the architecture of renal structures to assess the nephron status. An accurate evaluation of vascular and stromal injury is crucial for determining kidney acceptance, which is currently based on the pathologists’ histological evaluations on renal biopsies in addition to clinical data. In this context, automated algorithms may offer crucial support to histopathological image analysis. An example is given in this Special Issue [13].
Although the performance of a machine learning algorithm depends on the amount of available data, few studies have explored the minimal amount of data required to train a CNN in medical deep learning or the possibility of having scarce annotations [14]. An innovative contribution is given in this Special Issue [15]. The paper explores the minimum number of patients required to train a U-Net that accurately segments the prostate on T2-weighted MRI images. A U-Net was trained on patient numbers that ranged from 8 to 320 and its performance was measured. The Dice score significantly increased from training sizes of 8 to 120 patients and then plateaued with minimal improvement after 160 cases. This study suggests that modest dataset sizes could be sufficient to segment other organs effectively as well.
The correlation between conjunctival pallor (on physical examinations) and anemia paved the way for new non-invasive methods for monitoring and identifying the potential risks of this important pathology. A critical research challenge for this task is represented by designing a reliable automated segmentation procedure for the eyelid conjunctiva. A graph partitioning segmentation approach is proposed in [16], exploiting normalized cuts for perceptual grouping, thereby introducing a bias towards spectrophotometry features of hemoglobin. The segmentation task has been further investigated by a subsequent work, proposing a deep-learning-based approach involving a deconvolutional neural network [17]. The overall pipeline for building a reliable estimator is composed of several smaller tasks having multiple research challenges [18,19]. For instance, starting from the digital image capturing phase, the process is affected by heterogeneous ambient lighting conditions and intrinsic color balancing techniques by the device [20].
An efficient framework for enhancing and segmenting brain MRIs to identify a tumor is discussed in [21]. The hybridized fuzzy clustering and distance regularized level set (DRLS) technique effectively extracted the region of interest (ROI) in the brain slices. For identifying the ROI, fuzzy clustering was employed by selecting the number of clusters k, validated using the silhouette metric. In post-processing, the ROI mining techniques, marker controlled watershed segmentation, seed region growing and DRLS were adopted to extract the anomalous section from the segmented objects [22,23]. Tumor volume computation and 3D-modeling of the clinical dataset abnormalities were performed using the physical spacing metadata available in the header of the DICOM images considered. This can help physicists locate the tumor and determine other information (e.g., size and shape) during initial diagnosis, and thereby the process of treating the tumor may be enhanced.
Finally, one paper in this Special Issue has addressed the problem of identifying the volume status of patients [24]. The method was developed within a long-standing research activity on the automated investigation of the pulsatility of the inferior vena cava (IVC) from ultrasound measurements. The clinical approach is based on the subjective choice of a fixed direction along which to investigate IVC pulsations. However, the vein may have a complicated shape and show respirophasic movements, which introduce uncertainties into the clinical evaluation. Two automated methods have been introduced to delineate the IVC edges along sections either transverse or longitudinal to the blood vessel [25,26,27]. Preliminary results have shown the importance of using these automated methods to obtain more repeatable, reliable, and accurate information on IVC pulsatility than when using subjective clinical methods [28,29,30,31]. In this Special Issue, the two views are used to extract features that, integrated by a classification algorithm, can result in improved performance in diagnosing the volemic status of patients [24].

3. Future Perspectives

The research fields of biomedical image processing and classification have reached high levels of insight. Their integration into CAD systems can greatly contribute to supporting medical doctors to refine their clinical picture. In the near future, further growth in contributions to this field is expected; for example, taking advantage of increasing digitalization, deep learning has the potential to provide efficient solutions to many medical problems.
However, the real challenge is to bring an increasing number of systems into the hands of doctors, so that they can be applied to patients. This requires leaving the laboratory, engineering the systems, certifying the products, and identifying the correct target market that can accommodate the new devices and allow adequate support for these activities. In order to speed up this innovation process, the collaboration between researchers, institutions, funders, and entrepreneurs is always more important. The ”do-it-all-yourself” approach only makes sense in a world of scarce external knowledge, but today knowledge is spread as it has never been before. Thus, in order to improve the wellness of the whole community [32], a dynamic environment in which new high-impact solutions can be created will be able to grow only if there is collaboration among organizations.

Funding

This research was carried out as part of the project “Method and apparatus to characterize non-invasive images containing venous blood vessels”, funded through the PoC Instrument initiative, implemented by LINKS, with the support of LIFFT, with funds from Campagnia di San Paolo.

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank all authors who contributed to this Special Issue, the reviewers for their help in refining the papers and the MDPI editorial board and staff for the opportunity to be guest-editor.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Deserno, T.M. Biomedical Image Processing; Springe: New York, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  2. Maier, A.; Steidl, S.; Christlein, V.; Hornegger, J. Medical Imaging Systems: An Introductory Guide, New York; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2018; Volume 11111. [Google Scholar]
  3. Merletti, R.; Muceli, S. Tutorial. Surface EMG detection in space and time: Best practices. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 2019, 49, 102363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Mesin, L.; Mokabberi, F.; Carlino, C.F. Automated Morphological Measurements of Brain Structures and Identification of Optimal Surgical Intervention for Chiari I Malformation. IEEE J. Biomed. Health Inform. 2020, 24, 3144–3153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Theodoridis, S.; Koutroumbas, K. Pattern Recognition; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  6. Bevilacqua, V.; Brunetti, A.; Guerriero, A.; Trotta, G.F.; Telegrafo, M.; Moschetta, M. A performance comparison between shallow and deeper neural networks supervised classification of tomosynthesis breast lesions images. Cogn. Syst. Res. 2019, 53, 3–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Tiwari, A.; Srivastava, S.; Pant, M. Brain tumor segmentation and classification from magnetic resonance images: Review of selected methods from 2014 to 2019. Pattern Recognit. Lett. 2020, 131, 244–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Yanase, J.; Triantaphyllou, E. A systematic survey of computer-aided diagnosis in medicine: Past and present developments. Expert Syst. Appl. 2019, 138, 112821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Altini, N.; Cascarano, G.; Brunetti, A.; Marino, F.; Rocchetti, M.; Matino, S.; Venere, U.; Rossini, M.; Pesce, F.; Gesualdo, L.; et al. Semantic Segmentation Framework for Glomeruli Detection and Classification in Kidney Histological Sections. Electronics 2020, 9, 503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Altini, N.; Cascarano, G.D.; Brunetti, A.; De Feudis, I.; Buongiorno, D.; Rossini, M.; Pesce, F.; Gesualdo, L.; Bevilacqua, V. A deep learning instance segmentation approach for global glomerulosclerosis assessment in donor kidney biopsies. Electronics 2020, 9, 1768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Chen, H.; Qi, X.; Yu, L.; Dou, Q.; Qin, J.; Heng, P.-A. DCAN: Deep contour-aware networks for object instance segmentation from histology images. Med. Image Anal. 2017, 36, 135–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Janowczyk, A.; Madabhushi, A. Deep learning for digital pathology image analysis: A comprehensive tutorial with selected use cases. J. Pathol. Inform. 2016, 7, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Salvi, M.; Mogetta, A.; Meiburger, K.; Gambella, A.; Molinaro, L.; Barreca, A.; Papotti, M.; Molinari, F. Karpinski Score under Digital Investigation: A Fully Automated Segmentation Algorithm to Identify Vascular and Stromal Injury of Donors’ Kidneys. Electronics 2020, 9, 1644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Tajbakhsh, N.; Jeyaseelan, L.; Li, Q.; Chiang, J.N.; Wu, Z.; Ding, X. Embracing imperfect datasets: A review of deep learning solutions for medical image segmentation. Med. Image Anal. 2020, 63, 101693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  15. Bardis, M.; Houshyar, R.; Chantaduly, C.; Ushinsky, A.; Glavis-Bloom, J.; Shaver, M.; Chow, D.; Uchio, E.; Chang, P. Deep Learning with Limited Data: Organ Segmentation Performance by U-Net. Electronics 2020, 9, 1199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Dimauro, G.; Simone, L. Novel Biased Normalized Cuts Approach for the Automatic Segmentation of the Conjunctiva. Electronics 2020, 9, 997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kasiviswanathan, S.; Bai Vijayan, T.; Simone, L.; Dimauro, G. Semantic Segmentation of Conjunctiva Region for Non-Invasive Anemia Detection Applications. Electronics 2020, 9, 1309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Dimauro, G.; De Ruvo, S.; Di Terlizzi, F.; Ruggieri, A.; Volpe, V.; Colizzi, L.; Girardi, F. Estimate of Anemia with New Non-Invasive Systems—A Moment of Reflection. Electronics 2020, 9, 780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Dimauro, G.; Caivano, D.; Di Pilato, P.; Dipalma, A.; Camporeale, M.G. A Systematic Mapping Study on Research in Anemia Assessment with Non-Invasive Devices. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Dimauro, G.; Guarini, A.; Caivano, D.; Girardi, F.; Pasciolla, C.; Iacobazzi, A. Detecting Clinical Signs of Anaemia from Digital Images of the Palpebral Conjunctiva. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 113488–113498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Kanniappan, S.; Samiayya, D.; Vincent P M, D.; Srinivasan, K.; Jayakody, D.; Reina, D.; Inoue, A. An Efficient Hybrid Fuzzy-Clustering Driven 3D-Modeling of Magnetic Resonance Imagery for Enhanced Brain Tumor Diagnosis. Electronics 2020, 9, 475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Srinivasan, K.; Gowthaman, T.; Nema, A. Application of structural group sparsity recovery model for brain MRI. In Proceedings of the SPIE 10806, Tenth International Conference on Digital Image Processing, Shanghai, China, 11–14 May 2018; p. 108065H. [Google Scholar]
  23. Srinivasan, K.; Ankur, A.; Sharma, A. Super-resolution of Magnetic Resonance Images using deep Convolutional Neural Networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Consumer Electronics—Taiwan (ICCE-TW), Taipei, Taiwan, 12–14 June 2017; pp. 41–42. [Google Scholar]
  24. Mesin, L.; Roatta, S.; Pasquero, P.; Porta, M. Automated Volume Status Assessment Using Inferior Vena Cava Pulsatility. Electronics 2020, 9, 1671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Mesin, L.; Pasquero, P.; Albani, S.; Porta, M.; Roatta, S. Semi-automated tracking and continuous monitoring of inferior vena cava diameter in simulated and experimental ultrasound imaging. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 2015, 41, 845–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Mesin, L.; Pasquero, P.; Roatta, S. Tracking and Monitoring Pulsatility of a Portion of Inferior Vena Cava from Ultrasound Imaging in Long Axis. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 2019, 45, 1338–1343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Mesin, L.; Pasquero, P.; Roatta, S. Multi-directional assessment of Respiratory and Cardiac Pulsatility of the Inferior Vena Cava from Ultrasound Imaging in Short Axis. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 2020, 46, 3475–3482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Mesin, L.; Giovinazzo, T.; D’Alessandro, S.; Roatta, S.; Raviolo, A.; Chiacchiarini, F.; Porta, M.; Pasquero, P. Improved repeatability of the estimation of pulsatility of inferior vena cava. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 2019, 45, 2830–2843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Mesin, L.; Albani, S.; Sinagra, G. Non-invasive Estimation of Right Atrial Pressure using the Pulsatility of Inferior Vena Cava. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 2019, 45, 1331–1337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Albani, S.; Pinamonti, B.; Giovinazzo, T.; de Scordilli, M.; Fabris, E.; Stolfo, D.; Perkan, A.; Gregorio, C.; Barbati, G.; Geri, P.; et al. Accuracy of right atrial pressure estimation using a multi-parameter approach derived from inferior vena cava semi-automated edge-tracking echocardiography: A pilot study in patients with cardiovascular disorders. Int. J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 2020, 36, 1213–1225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Folino, A.; Benzo, M.; Pasquero, P.; Laguzzi, A.; Mesin, L. Messere, A.; Porta, M.; Roatta, S. Vena Cava Responsiveness to Controlled Isovolumetric Respiratory Efforts. J. Ultrasound Med. 2017, 36, 2113–2123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Chesbrough, H.W. Open Innovation. The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology; Harvard Business Review Press: Brighton, Boston, MA, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mesin, L. Biomedical Image Processing and Classification. Electronics 2021, 10, 66. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10010066

AMA Style

Mesin L. Biomedical Image Processing and Classification. Electronics. 2021; 10(1):66. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10010066

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mesin, Luca. 2021. "Biomedical Image Processing and Classification" Electronics 10, no. 1: 66. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10010066

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop