Efficient cell segmentation tool for confocal microscopy tissue images and quantitative evaluation of FISH signals

Microscopy Research and Technique

Volumn 44, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 49-68

  Umesh Adiga, P S ^a   Chaudhuri, B B ^a  

^a INDIAN STATISTICAL INSTITUTE   (India)

Author keywords

Cell nuclei; Confocal microscopy; Enhancement; FISH signal; Histopathological; Segmentation

Indexed keywords

CELLS; CYTOLOGY; FISH; FLUORESCENCE MICROSCOPY; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE SEGMENTATION; PIXELS; TISSUE;

CELL NUCLEUS; ENHANCEMENT; FLUORESCENCE IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; FLUORESCENCE IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION SIGNAL; HISTOPATHOLOGICAL; HYBRIDIZATION SIGNAL; IMAGE SLICES; QUANTITATIVE EVALUATION; SEGMENTATION; TISSUE IMAGES;

CONFOCAL MICROSCOPY;

ARTICLE; CELL NUCLEUS; CONFOCAL MICROSCOPY; FLUORESCENCE IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING;

EID: 0344334039     PISSN: 1059910X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0029(19990101)44:1<49::AID-JEMT6>3.0.CO;2-6     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Adelh D, Brugal G, Chassery TM, et al. 1978. Microscopic image analysis system : Applications to biology : Cell cycle cancerous blood and bonemarrow cells. Proc 4th Int Conf Patt Rec, Kyoto, Japan, p 864-871.
2. Amini AA, Weymouth TE, Jain RC. 1990. Using dynamic programming for solving the variational problems in vision. IEEE Trans Patt Anal Mac Intell 12: 855-867.
3. Anil KJ. 1995. Fundamentals of digital image processing. New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India.
4. Adiga PSU, Chaudhuri BB, Rodenacker K. 1996. Semi- automatic segmentation of confocal microscopy images. In: Proceedings of 13th International Conference on Pattern Recognition, ICPR-96, Vienna, 4:494-497.
5. Adiga PSU, Chaudhuri BB. 1998. Segmentation and counting of FISH signals in confocal microscopy images. MICRON Int J Microscopy Studies (in press).
6. Adiga P S U, Chaudhuri BB. 1998a. Segmentation of 3-D histopathological images by surface following using constrained snakes. In: Proceedings of 14th International Conference on Pattern Recognition, ICPR-98, Brisbane, Australia (in press).
7. Adiga PSU, Chaudhuri BB. 1998b. Segmentation of 3-D histopathological images using snakes and its application in quantitative evaluation of FISH signal. In: Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Medical Image Understanding and Analysis, MIUA-98, Leeds, UK (in press).
8. Aubele M, Zitzelsberger H, Szucs S, et al. 1996. Comparative FISH analysis of numerical chromosome 7 abnormalities in 5 μm and 15 μm paraffin-embedded tissue sections from prostatic carcinoma. Int J Histochem.
9. Bengtson E, Errickson O, Holmquist J, et al. 1977 . Low resolution segmentation of cervical cells, Report 77-3. Dept. Clin. Cytol, University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.
10. Choi H-K. 1996 . New methods for image analysis of tissue sections, Ph.D. thesis. Centre for Image Analysis, Uppsala University, Sweden.
11. Cohen AR, Roysam B, Turner JN. 1994. Automated tracing and volume measurements of neurons from 3-D confocal fluorescence microscopy data., J Microsc 173:1-12.
12. Dhingra K, Sneige N, Pandita TK, et al. 1994 . Quantitative analysis of chromosome in situ hybridization signal in paraffin embedded tissue sections. Cytometry 16:100-112.
13. Garbay C. 1986. Image Structure Representation and Processing: A discussion of some segmentation methods in cytology, IEEE Transaction on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 8:140-146.
14. Jain AK. 1995. Fundamentals of Digital Image Processing. Prentice-Hall India Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi.
15. Johnson GD, de C Nogueira Araujo GM. 1981. A simple method of reducing the fading of immunofluorescence during microscopy. Immunol Methods 43:349-350
16. Kass M, Witkin A, Teropoulos D. 1988. Snakes: active contour models. Proc First Int Conf Comp Vis 259-269.
17. Lai K F. 1994. Deformable contours: modelling, extraction, detection and classification. Ph.D. Thesis. Dept. of Electrical Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
18. Marr D, Hilderth EC. 1980. Theory of edge detection. Proc R Soc Lond B 207:187-217.
19. Mendelsohn ML, Mayall BH, Perry BH. 1971. Generalised grayness profiles applied to edge detection and the organization of chromosome images. In: Laughlin JS, Webster RW, editors. Advances in medical imaging. 327-345.
20. Nordin B. 1989. Development of an automatic pre-screener for the early detection of cervical cancer : algorithms and implementation. Ph.D. Thesis. Dept. of Scientific Computing, Uppsala University, Sweden.
21. Pawley J, editor. 1990. Handbook of confocal microscopy. London: Academic Press.
22. Preston K Jr, Bartels PH. 1988. Automated image processing for cells and tissues. In: Newhouse VL, editor. Progress in medical imaging. New York: Springer Verlag, p 1-121.
23. Prewitt JMS. 1972. Parametric and non-parametric recognition by computer: an application to leukocyte image processing. Adv Comput 12:285-414.
24. Rodenacker K, Aubele M, Hutzler P, Umesh Adiga P S. 1997. Groping for quantitative digital 3-d image analysis : an approach to quantitative fluorescence in situ hybridization in thick tissue sections of prostate carcinoma. Int J Anal Cell Pathol 15:19-29.
25. Rosenfeld A, De La Torre P. 1983. Histogram concavity analysis as an aid in threshold selection. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybernet 13:231-235.
26. Russ JC. 1995. Handbook of image processing, 2nd ed. London: CRC Press.
27. Sahoo PK, Soltani S, Wong AKC, Chen YC. 1988. Survey, a servey of thresholding techniques. Int J Computer Vision Graphics Image Processing 41: 233-260.
28. Tekola P, Baak JPA, Beli''en JAM, Brugghe J. 1994. Highly sensitive, specific, and stable new fluorescent DNA stains for confocal laser microscopy and image processing of normal paraffin sections, Cytometry 17:191-195.
29. Yasnoff WA, Bacus JW. 1984. Scene segmentation algorithm development using error measures. Anal Quant Cytol 6:45-58.
30. Zitzelsberger H, Szücs S, Weier H-U, Lehmann L, Braselmann H, Enders S, Schilling A, Breul J, Höfler H, Bauchinger M. 1994. Numerical abnormalities of chromosome 7 in human prostate cancer detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) on paraffin-embedded tissue sections with centromere-specific DNA probes. J Pathol 172:325-335.