Multilevel principal component analysis (mPCA) in shape analysis: A feasibility study in medical and dental imaging. Issue 129 (June 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Farnell, D.J.J.; Popat, H.; Richmond, S.
• Is Part Of: Computer methods and programs in biomedicine. Issue 129(2016)
• Page Start: 149
• Page End: 159
• Publication Date: 2016-06
• Subjects: Multilevel PCA -- Active shape models -- Dentistry; Medicine -- Computer programs -- Periodicals; Biology -- Computer programs -- Periodicals; Computers -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Médecine -- Logiciels -- Périodiques; Biologie -- Logiciels -- Périodiques; Biology -- Computer programs; Medicine -- Computer programs; Periodicals; Electronic journals; 610.28
• DOI: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2016.01.005
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0169-2607

Abstract

Highlights: mPCA in ASMs can be used in medical and dental image analysis. Results provided by mPCA in initial studies appear to be sensible. Between- and within-subject variations are modelled correctly using mPCA. mPCA has more flexibility, control, and accuracy than standard PCA. mPCA is the correct method of combining sets of landmark points from different experts. Abstract: Background and objective: Methods used in image processing should reflect any multilevel structures inherent in the image dataset or they run the risk of functioning inadequately. We wish to test the feasibility of multilevel principal components analysis (PCA) to build active shape models (ASMs) for cases relevant to medical and dental imaging. Methods: Multilevel PCA was used to carry out model fitting to sets of landmark points and it was compared to the results of "standard" (single-level) PCA. Proof of principle was tested by applying mPCA to model basic peri-oral expressions (happy, neutral, sad) approximated to the junction between the mouth/lips. Monte Carlo simulations were used to create this data which allowed exploration of practical implementation issues such as the number of landmark points, number of images, and number of groups (i.e., "expressions" for this example). To further test the robustness of the method, mPCA was subsequently applied to a dental imaging dataset utilising landmark points (placed by different clinicians) along the boundary of mandibular cortical bone in panoramic radiographs of the face. Results: Changes of expression that varied between groups were modelled correctly at one level of the model and changes in lip width that varied within groups at another for the Monte Carlo dataset. Extreme cases in the test dataset were modelled adequately by mPCA but not by standard PCA. Similarly, variations in the shape of the cortical bone were modelled by one level of mPCA and variations between the experts at another for the panoramic radiographs dataset. Results for mPCA were found to be comparable to those of standard PCA for point-to-point errors via miss-one-out testing for this dataset. These errors reduce with increasing number of eigenvectors/values retained, as expected. Conclusions: We have shown that mPCA can be used in shape models for dental and medical image processing. mPCA was found to provide more control and flexibility when compared to standard "single-level" PCA. Specifically, mPCA is preferable to "standard" PCA when multiple levels occur naturally in the dataset.