Cited by 8Fetal and Pediatric Neurological DisordersArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis

Simulating realistic fetal neurosonography images with appearance and growth change using cycle-consistent adversarial networks and an evaluation

Open access
Xu, Yangdi, Lee, Lok Hin, Drukker, Lior, Yaqub, Mohammad, Papageorghiou, Aris T., Noble, Alison J.·2020·Journal of medical imaging

Abstract

Purpose: We present an original method for simulating realistic fetal neurosonography images specifically generating third-trimester pregnancy ultrasound images from second-trimester images. Our method was developed using unpaired data, as pairwise data were not available. We also report original insights on the general appearance differences between second- and third-trimester fetal head transventricular (TV) plane images. Approach: We design a cycle-consistent adversarial network (Cycle-GAN) to simulate visually realistic third-trimester images from unpaired second- and third-trimester ultrasound images. Simulation realism is evaluated qualitatively by experienced sonographers who blindly graded real and simulated images. A quantitative evaluation is also performed whereby a validated deep-learning-based image recognition algorithm (ScanNav®) acts as the expert reference to allow hundreds of real and simulated images to be automatically analyzed and compared efficiently. Results: Qualitative evaluation shows that the human expert cannot tell the difference between real and simulated third-trimester scan images. 84.2% of the simulated third-trimester images could not be distinguished from the real third-trimester images. As a quantitative baseline, on 3000 images, the visibility drop of the choroid, CSP, and mid-line falx between real second- and real third-trimester scans was computed by ScanNav® and found to be 72.5%, 61.5%, and 67%, respectively. The visibility drop of the same structures between real second-trimester and simulated third-trimester was found to be 77.5%, 57.7%, and 56.2%, respectively. Therefore, the real and simulated third-trimester images were consider to be visually similar to each other. Our evaluation also shows that the third-trimester simulation of a conventional GAN is much easier to distinguish, and the visibility drop of the structures is smaller than our proposed method. Conclusions: The results confirm that it is possible to simulate realistic third-trimester images from second-trimester images using a modified Cycle-GAN, which may be useful for deep learning researchers with a restricted availability of third-trimester scans but with access to ample second trimester images. We also show convincing simulation improvements, both qualitatively and quantitatively, using the Cycle-GAN method compared with a conventional GAN. Finally, the use of a machine learning-based reference (in the case ScanNav®) for large-scale quantitative image analysis evaluation is also a first to our knowledge.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1117/1.jmi.7.5.057001

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The primary limitation of AI US imaging in fetal neurosonography was rapid anatomical development of fetal brain structures due to brain maturation, increasing head size and degree of ossification with rising GA.

    “The primary limitation of AI US imaging in this topic was described to be the rapid anatomical development of fetal brain structures due to brain maturation, increasing head size and degree of ossification with rising GA [78,80,84].”

    From Evolving the Era of 5D Ultrasound? A Systematic Literature Review on the Applications for Artificial Intelligence Ultrasound Imaging in Obstetrics and Gynecology (2023) · cites this paper as [84]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says fetal neurosonography images change between the second and third trimesters because of brain maturation, fetal size, and skull ossification. Section 3.1 (page unavailable) adds that skull calcification makes internal brain structures harder to see. The paper does not identify these changes as the primary limitation of AI ultrasound imaging. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Xu et al. presented an AI method for authentically simulating third-trimester images from second-trimester images.

    “Xu et al. presented an AI method for authentically simulating third-trimester images from second-trimester images for deep-learning researchers with restricted access to third-trimester images [84].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. J. M. Wolterink et al., "MR-to-CT synthesis using cycle-consistent generative adversarial networks," in 31st Conf. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. (2017).
  2. T. Salimans et al., "Improved techniques for training GANs," in Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., pp. 2234-2242 (2016).
  3. Yangdi Xu graduated from the University of Bristol and specialized in machine learning and computer vision. His research focused on modeling human daily routine/activity patterns from images and videos. As a research associate at the University of Oxford, his research focuses on ultrasound image analysis using deep-learning models. His project collaborates with the John Redcliff Hospital and involves but is not limited to obstetric ultrasound image simulations and gaze pattern modeling of sonographers.
  4. Lok Hin Lee is a DPhil candidate at the Institute of Biomedical Imaging, University of Oxford.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Xu, Y., Lee, L. H., Drukker, L., Yaqub, M., Papageorghiou, A. T., & Noble, A. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • John Radcliffe Hospital (GB)
  • Intelligent Ultrasound Limited (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • Univ. of Oxford
Venue
Journal of medical imaging
Published
2020-09-16
Volume
7
Issue
05
Pages
1-15
ISSN
  • 2329-4302 (ISSN-L)
  • 2329-4310
OpenAlex
W3087663537
Cited by
8
References
22
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2
FWCI
1.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of medical imaging (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • St George's Online Research Archive (St George's University of London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/M013774/1, EP/MO13774/1, EP/L505316/1)
  • H2020 European Research Council (694581)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Fetal and Pediatric Neurological Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Generative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
Keywords
fetal neurosonography, image simulation, third trimester ultrasound, second-trimester ultrasound, fetal head, CycleGAN, unpaired data, corpus callosum, falx

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review