Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Radon-Domain Detection of the Nipple and the Pectoral Muscle in Mammograms

  • Published:
Journal of Digital Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, methods are presented for automatic detection of the nipple and the pectoral muscle edge in mammograms via image processing in the Radon domain. Radon-domain information was used for the detection of straight-line candidates with high gradient. The longest straight-line candidate was used to identify the pectoral muscle edge. The nipple was detected as the convergence point of breast tissue components, indicated by the largest response in the Radon domain. Percentages of false-positive (FP) and false-negative (FN) areas were determined by comparing the areas of the pectoral muscle regions delimited manually by a radiologist and by the proposed method applied to 540 mediolateral-oblique (MLO) mammographic images. The average FP and FN were 8.99% and 9.13%, respectively. In the detection of the nipple, an average error of 7.4 mm was obtained with reference to the nipple as identified by a radiologist on 1,080 mammographic images (540 MLO and 540 craniocaudal views).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig 1
Fig 2
Fig 3
Fig 4
Fig 5
Fig 6
Fig 7
Fig 8
Fig 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Belogay E, Cabrelli C, Molter U, Shonkwiler R: Calculating the Hausdorff distance between curves. Inf Process Lett 64:17–22, 1997

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Canny J: A computational approach to edge detection. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 8(6):679–698, 1986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Catté F, Lons PL, Morel JM, Coll T: Image selective smoothing and edge detection by nonlinear diffusion-I. SIAM J Numer Anal 29(1):182–193, 1992

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Catté F, Lons PL, Morel JM, Coll T: Image selective smoothing and edge detection by nonlinear diffusion-II. SIAM J Numer Anal 29(1):845–866, 1992

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Chandrasekhar R, Attikiouzel Y: A simple method for automatically locating the nipple on mammograms. IEEE Trans Med Imag 16(5):483–494, 1997

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ferrari RJ, Rangayyan RM, Desautels JEL, Borges RA, Frère AF: Analysis of asymmetry in mammograms via directional filtering with Gabor wavelets. IEEE Trans Med Imag 20(9):953–964, 2001

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Ferrari RJ, Rangayyan RM, Desautels JEL, Borges RA, Frère AF: Automatic identification of pectoral muscle in mammograms. IEEE Trans Med Imag 23(2):232–245, 2004

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gonzalez RC, Woods RE: Digital image processing. Boston, MA: Addison Wesley Pub. Co. Inc, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hou Z, Giger ML, Wolverton DE, Zhong W: Computerized analysis of mammographic parenchymal patterns for breast cancer risk assessment: feature selection. Med Phys 27(1):4–12, 2000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kapur JN, Sahoo PK, Wong AKC: A new method for grey-level picture thresholding using the entropy of the histogram. Comput Vis Graph Image Process 29:273–285, 1985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Karssemeijer N: Automated classification of parenchymal pattern in mammograms. Phys Med Biol 43:365–378, 1998

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kinoshita SK, Azevedo Marques PM, Frére AF, Marana HRC, Ferrari RJ, Villela RL: Comparative analysis of shape and texture features in classification of breast masses in digitized mammograms. In: Hanson KM Ed. Medical Imaging. Proceedings of SPIE 2000; 3979, pp 872–879

  13. Martins ACG, Rangayyan RM: Texture element extraction via cepstral filtering in the Radon domain. IETE Journal of Research India. 48(3&4):143–150, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  14. Martins ACG, Rangayyan RM: Complex cepstral filtering of images and echo removal in the Radon domain. Pattern Recogn 30(11):1931–1938, 1997

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mendez AJ, Tahoces PG, Lado MJ, Souto M, Correa JL, Vidal JJ: Automatic detection of breast border and nipple in digital mammograms. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 49:253–262, 1996

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Nishikawa RM, Giger ML, Vyborny CJ, Bick U, Doi K, Schmidt RA: Prospective computer analysis of cancer missed on screening mammography. In: Yaffe MJ Ed. Proceedings of 5th International Workshop on Digital Mammography, Toronto, Canada, 2000, pp 493–498

  17. Otsu N: A threshold selection method from grey-level histogram. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 8:62–66, 1978

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Perona P, Malik J: Scale-space and edge detection using anisotropic diffusion. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 12(7):629–639, 1990

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Rangayyan RM, Rolston WA: Directional image analysis with the Hough and Radon transforms. J Indian Inst Sci 78:3–16, 1998

    Google Scholar 

  20. Rangayyan RM: Biomedical Image Analysis. Boca Raton FL: CRC Press, 2005

    Google Scholar 

  21. Reddi SS, Rudin SF, Keshavan HR: An optimal multiple threshold scheme for image segmentation. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 14:661–665, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ridler T, Carvard S: Picture thresholding using an iterative selection method. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 8:630–632, 1978

    Google Scholar 

  23. Robb RA: X-ray computed tomography: an engineering synthesis of mulitscientific principles. CRC Crit Rev Biomed Eng 7:264–333, 1982

    Google Scholar 

  24. Sahoo PK, Soltani S, Wong AKC, Chen YC: A survey of thresholding techniques. Comput Vis Graph Image Process 41:233–260, 1988

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sampat MP, Whitman GJ, Markey MK, Bovik AC: Detection of spiculated lesions in mammograms. In Fitzpatrick M, Reinhardt JM Eds. Imaging Processing. Proceedings of SPIE Medical Imaging 2005. Vol. 5747, pp 26–37

  26. Segall CA, Acton ST: Morphological anisotropic diffusion. IEEE International Conference on Image Processing, Santa Barbara, CA, October 26–29. 3:348–351, 1997

  27. Srinivasa N, Ramakrishnan KR, Rajgopal K: Detection of edges from projections. IEEE Trans Med Imag 11(1):76–80, 1992

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Tsai W: Moment-preserving thresholding: a new approach. Comput Vis Graph Image Process 29:377–393, 1985

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Zhou C, Chan H-P, Petrick N, Helvie MA, Goodsitt MM, Sahiner B, Hadjiski LM: Computerized image analysis: estimation of breast density on mammograms. Med Phys 28(6):1056–1069, 2001

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Yin FF, Giger ML, Doi K, Vyborny CJ, Schmidt RA: Computerized detection of masses in digital mammograms: analysis of bilateral subtraction images. Med Phys 18(5):955–963, 1994

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

We thank the radiologists and faculty members of the Medical Center of the Faculty of Medicine, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil, for providing the mammograms used in this work. We thank the State of São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP); the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq); the Foundation to Aid Teaching, Research, and Patient Care of the Clinical Hospital of Ribeirão Preto (FAEPA/HCRP); and the Catalyst Program of Research Services of the University of Calgary for financial support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Image Science and Medical Physics Center, Internal Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine of Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Avenida dos Bandeirantes, 3900, 14048-900, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil

    S. K. Kinoshita, P. M. Azevedo-Marques, R. R. Pereira Jr & J. A. H. Rodrigues

  2. Department of Electrical Engineering, University of São Paulo, Avenida do Trabalhador Sancarlense 400, 13560-250, São Carlos, São Paulo, Brazil

    S. K. Kinoshita

  3. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Schulich School of Engineering, and Department of Radiology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4, Canada

    R. M. Rangayyan

  4. Department of Radiology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4, Canada

    R. M. Rangayyan

Authors
  1. S. K. Kinoshita
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. M. Azevedo-Marques
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R. R. Pereira Jr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. A. H. Rodrigues
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. R. M. Rangayyan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. M. Azevedo-Marques.

Appendix

Appendix

Hausdorff Distance

Hausdorff distance1 is the maximum distance of the points in a set to the corresponding nearest points in another set. Formally, the Hausdorff distance from set A to set B is a maximin function, defined as

$${\text{h}}{\left( {{\text{A,B}}} \right)} = {\mathop {{\mathbf{max}}}\limits_{a \in A} }{\left\{ {{\mathop {{\mathbf{min}}{\left\{ {{\mathbf{d}}{\left( {{\mathbf{a}}{\text{,}}{\mathbf{b}}} \right)}} \right\}}}\limits_{b \in B} }} \right\}}$$

where, a and b are points of sets A and B, respectively, and d(a,b) is any metric between these points; for simplicity, we take d(a,b) as the Euclidian distance between a and b.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kinoshita, S.K., Azevedo-Marques, P.M., Pereira, R.R. et al. Radon-Domain Detection of the Nipple and the Pectoral Muscle in Mammograms. J Digit Imaging 21, 37–49 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-007-9035-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-007-9035-6

Key words

Search

Navigation