IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,277,712
Granted Patent B2
US 12,277,712 · App. 18/595,213 · Granted Apr 15, 2025

Method for generating a 3D physical model of a patient specific anatomic feature from 2D medical images

Inventors: Niall Haslam (Belfast, GB); Lorenzo Trojan (Belfast, GB); Daniel Crawford (Belfast, GB)
Assignee: Axial Medical Printing Limited
G06T7/11G06F18/24G06T7/0014G06T17/20G06V10/26G16H30/40G16H50/50G16H50/70G06T2200/08G06T2207/30004G06V2201/03
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,277,712
App. No.
18/595,213
Granted
Apr 15, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

There is provided a method for generating a 3D physical model of a patient specific anatomic feature from 2D medical images. The 2D medical images are uploaded by an end-user via a Web Application and sent to a server. The server processes the 2D medical images and automatically generates a 3D printable model of a patient specific anatomic feature from the 2D medical images using a segmentation technique. The 3D printable model is 3D printed as a 3D physical model such that it represents a 1:1 scale of the patient specific anatomic feature. The method includes the step of automatically identifying the patient specific anatomic feature.

Claims (45)

1. A computer-implemented method for defining patient specific anatomical features from medical images, the computer-implemented method comprising:

receiving medical images and information on bone and/or soft tissue of a patient;

applying the information as an input to a segmentation algorithm to automatically process the medical images to assign a label for each pixel of the medical images based at least partially on the bone and/or soft tissue, the segmentation algorithm including a convolutional Neural Network method trained from a database of existing medical images that have been labelled and a medical imaging ontology;

accessing a database of medical image anatomical features;

using an anatomical feature identification algorithm to probabilistically match the labeled pixels of the medical images against the database of medical image anatomical features to generate segmentation data that defines one or more patient specific anatomical features based on the labeled pixels of the medical images; and

generating a 3D model of the one or more patient specific anatomical features comprising the bone and/or soft tissue using the generated segmentation data.

2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the information on bone and/or soft tissue of the patient comprises information of a type of the bone and/or soft tissue within the medical images.

3. The computer-implemented method of claim 2 , wherein the information of the type of bone and/or soft tissue is inputted by a user.

4. The computer-implemented method of claim 2 , wherein the information of the type of bone and/or soft tissue is captured from the medical images.

5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the segmentation algorithm comprises at least one of the following multiple segmentation techniques: threshold-based, decision tree, chained decision forest, or neural network method.

6. The computer-implemented method of claim 5 , further comprising combining results of each of the multiple segmentation techniques together to derive a final segmentation result.

7. The computer-implemented method of claim 5 , wherein the segmentation algorithm includes a thresholding algorithm that automatically estimates a threshold value for a pixel being classified as bone or soft tissue, the threshold value optimized based on one or more of the following parameters: scan type, bone type, tissue type, age, gender, and weight of the patient.

8. The computer-implemented method of claim 7 , wherein the threshold value is estimated from a histogram analysis of the medical images.

9. The computer-implemented method of claim 8 , wherein the histogram analysis comprises detecting peaks of a 2D medical images histogram corresponding to bone and/or soft tissue similar to bone and/or soft tissue within the medical images and, for each detected peak of the 2D medical images histogram:

deriving or determining a detected peak inflection point by calculating a zero of a 2D medical images histogram second derivative in proximity of a peak; and

deriving or determining an inflection offset between the peak and the inflection point,

wherein the estimated threshold value corresponds to the position of the detected peak with an offset corresponding to three times the derived or determined inflection offset.

10. The computer-implemented method of claim 9 , wherein, if an error occurs during peak detection of the 2D medical images histogram, the thresholding algorithm applies a default threshold value based on at least one of the bone and/or soft tissue of the patient or a scan type of the medical images.

11. The computer-implemented method of claim 7 , wherein the segmentation algorithm includes the thresholding algorithm in combination with a smoothing algorithm, the smoothing algorithm comprising a Gaussian filter.

12. The computer-implemented method of claim 11 , wherein the thresholding algorithm uses a logistic probabilistic function to calculate a likelihood of a pixel being a bone or soft tissue in question.

13. The computer-implemented method of claim 7 , wherein the thresholding algorithm is configured to segment out bone from background information within the medical images.

14. The computer-implemented method of claim 7 , wherein the bone type is selected from a list consisting of hard bone and soft bone.

15. The computer-implemented method of claim 7 , wherein the scan type is selected from a list consisting of CT, MRI, PET and SPECT.

16. The computer-implemented method of claim 7 , wherein the scan type is inputted by a user.

17. The computer-implemented method of claim 7 , wherein the segmentation algorithm includes a chained decision forest, in which a hierarchy of decision forests is used, wherein results of a decision tree and results from the thresholding algorithm are fed to a new decision tree alongside pixel values of the medical images.

18. The computer-implemented method of claim 17 , wherein each forest-node of the chained decision forest is treated as a simple classifier that produces a score indicative of a likelihood of a pixel being a bone or soft tissue in question.

19. The computer-implemented method of claim 17 , wherein the decision tree is created based on one or more of the following properties of medical images pixels: number of pixels resembling bone or soft tissue of interest located near a pixel in question, number of pixels resembling bone or soft tissue of interest located near a given pixel, or overall gradient of the image at a given pixel.

20. The computer-implemented method of claim 17 , wherein the decision tree is applied to a subset of pixels within the medical images and labels obtained from the subset are then up scaled using standard interpolation methods to recover segmentation of the full image and, wherein the subset of pixels is generated by subsampling the medical images, and wherein a subsampling stride is selected depending on pixel size.

21. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the convolutional Neural Network method comprises at least one of a Fully Convolutional Neural Network (FCNN) or a UNET Neural network.

22. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the database of medical image anatomical features comprises a graph database comprising nodes representing anatomic features including tissue type or organ type, and edges associated with relationships between the nodes, including: has part, proximity, attachment, ligament, or functional, wherein a node includes: a reference to a medical image with a corresponding anatomic feature, a reference to results of segmentation of a medical image with a corresponding anatomic feature, information relating to the anatomic feature including volume, surface area, or Hounsfield Unit standard deviation or average, and wherein the graph database is updated after the generation of a 3D model.

23. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , further comprising:

detecting touching bones or soft tissues within the 2D medical images; and

using an edge finding algorithm to separate different bones or soft tissues.

24. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , further comprising detecting a pathology of the one or more patient specific anatomical features comprising the bone and/or soft tissue by measuring deviation of the 3D model from an expected appearance of the one or more patient specific anatomical features comprising the bone and/or soft tissue.

25. The computer-implemented method of claim 24 , wherein the pathology of the one or more patient specific anatomical features comprising the bone and/or soft tissue comprises a skeletal deformity.

26. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the medical images are MRI images.

27. A system for defining patient specific anatomical features from medical images, the system comprising at least one processor configured to:

receive medical images and information on bone and/or soft tissue of a patient;

apply the information as an input to a segmentation algorithm to automatically process the medical images to assign a label for each pixel of the medical images based at least partially on the bone and/or soft tissue, the segmentation algorithm including a convolutional Neural Network method trained from a database of existing medical images that have been labelled and a medical imaging ontology;

access a database of medical image anatomical features;

use an anatomical feature identification algorithm to probabilistically match the labeled pixels of the medical images against the database of medical image anatomical features to generate segmentation data that defines one or more patient specific anatomical features based on the labeled pixels of the medical images; and

generate a 3D model of the one or more patient specific anatomical features comprising the bone and/or soft tissue using the generated segmentation data.

28. The system of claim 27 , wherein the information on bone and/or soft tissue of the patient comprises information of a type of the bone and/or soft tissue within the medical images.

29. The system of claim 27 , wherein the segmentation algorithm comprises at least one of the following multiple segmentation techniques: threshold-based, decision tree, chained decision forest, or neural network method.

30. The system of claim 29 , wherein the segmentation algorithm includes a thresholding algorithm that automatically estimates a threshold value for a pixel being classified as bone or soft tissue, the threshold value optimized based on one or more of the following parameters: scan type, bone type, tissue type, age, gender, and weight of the patient.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Mar 4, 2024
From: HASLAM, NIALL; TROJAN, LORENZO; CRAWFORD, DANIEL
To: AXIAL MEDICAL PRINTING LIMITED
Reel/Frame 066640/0668 →
Priority Claims (1)
GB 1617507 · Oct 14, 2016 · national
Continuity (7)
Continuation 18359821 · Jul 26, 2023
Continuation 18150112 · Jan 4, 2023
Continuation 17656189 · Mar 23, 2022
Continuation 17491183 · Sep 30, 2021
Continuation 17115102 · Dec 8, 2020
Continuation 16341554
Related Publication 20240202927A1 · Jun 20, 2024
References Cited (90)
US 5859891A · Hibbard · 1999 [cited by applicant]
US 9437119B1 · Bernal · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9646411B2 · Lee · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 10032281B1 · Ghesu et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10409235B2 · Zhou et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10946586B2 · Casey et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 10981680B2 · Colson et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11010800B2 · Norman · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11059228B2 · Elber et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11138790B2 · Haslam et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11288865B2 · Haslam et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11436801B2 · Haslam et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11497557B2 · Haslam et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11551420B2 · Haslam et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 11626212B2 · Crawford et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 11715210B2 · Haslam et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 11869670B2 · Crawford et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 11922631B2 · Haslam et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 12020375B2 · Haslam et al. · 2024 [cited by applicant]
US 20090316975A1 · Kunz et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20100156904A1 · Hartung · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20110038516A1 · Koehler et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110218428A1 · Westmoreland et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20120059252A1 · Li et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20120224755A1 · Wu · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20130002646A1 · Lin et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20140328529A1 · Koceski et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140361453A1 · Triantafyllou · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20150089337A1 · Grady et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150169985A1 · Burger et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150342537A1 · Taylor et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20160086078A1 · Ji et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160110517A1 · Taylor · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160300350A1 · Choi et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170007129A1 · Kaib et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170228505A1 · Allen et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170245821A1 · Itu et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170329930A1 · Fonte et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20180092699A1 · Finley · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180165867A1 · Kuhn et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180276815A1 · Xu et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180365835A1 · Yan et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190053855A1 · Siemionow et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190105009A1 · Siemionow et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190108635A1 · Hibbard et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190205606A1 · Zhou et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190251694A1 · Han et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190392942A1 · Sorenson et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20200074637A1 · Wong · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200367970A1 · Qiu et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200402647A1 · Domracheva et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20210068714A1 · Crowley et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210074425A1 · Carter et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210097690A1 · Mostapha et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210110605A1 · Haslam et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210335041A1 · Haslam et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
CN 105608728A · 2016 [cited by applicant]
CN 106373168A · 2017 [cited by applicant]
EP 3020537A1 · 2016 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2016161198A1 · 2016 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2018069736A1 · 2018 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2018222779A1 · 2018 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2020144483A1 · 2020 [cited by applicant]
Richmond, Mapping Stacked Decision Forests to Deep and Sparse Convolutional Neural Networks for Semantic Segmentation, 2015, arXiv (Year: 2015). [cited by examiner]
Tabrizi, P.R., Zoroofi, R.A., Yokota, F. et al. Acetabular cartilage segmentation in CT arthrography based on a bone-normalized probabilistic atlas. Int J CARS 10, 433-446, 2015. (Year: 2015). [cited by examiner]
M. Pinheiro and J. L. Alves, “A New Level-Set-Based Protocol for Accurate Bone Segmentation From CT Imaging,” in IEEE Access, vol. 3, pp. 1894-1906, 2015, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2015.2484259. (Year: 2015). [cited by examiner]
Richmond, A novel fast Otsu digital image segmentation method, The International Arab Journal of Information Technology, vol. 13, No. 4, Jul. 2016 (Year: 2016). [cited by examiner]
Baghaie, et al., An Optimization Method For Slice Interpolation of Medical Images, arXiv preprint arXiv:1402.0936 (Feb. 2014). [cited by applicant]
Boulton, et al., Lessons from the National Hip Fracture Database, Orthopaedics and Trauma, 30(2):123-127 (Apr. 2016). [cited by applicant]
Brown, et al., Using Machine Learning for Sequence-Level Automated MRI Protocol Selection in Neuroradiology, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 25(5):568-71 (May 2018). [cited by applicant]
Carvalho, et al., Estimating 3D lumen centerlines of carotid arteries in free-hand acquisition ultrasound, International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, 7(2):207-215 (Mar. 2012). [cited by applicant]
Cui, et al., Brain MRI Segmentation with Patch-Based CNN Approach, Proceedings of the 35th Chinese Control Conference, Jul. 27-29, 2016, pp. 7026-7031. [cited by applicant]
Dou, et al., 3D Deeply Supervised Network For Automated Segmentation of Volumetric Medical Images, Medical Image Analysis, 41:40-54 (Oct. 2017). [cited by applicant]
Geremia, et al., Spatial Decision Forests for MS Lesion Segmentation in Multi-Channel Magnetic Resonance Images, Neurolmage, 57(2):378-390 (Jul. 2011). [cited by applicant]
Heckelman, et al., “Design and validation of a semi-automatic bone segmentation algorithm from MRI to improve research efficiency,” Scientific Reports, vol. 12:7825, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-11785-6 (2022). [cited by applicant]
International Search Report & Written Opinion dated Feb. 16, 2018 in Int'l PCT Patent Appl. Serial No. PCT/GB2017/053125 (0110). [cited by applicant]
International Search Report & Written Opinion dated May 12, 2022 in Int'l PCT Patent Appl. Serial No. PCT/IB2022/051216 (0310). [cited by applicant]
International Search Report & Written Opinion dated Jun. 25, 2020 in Int'l PCT Patent Appl. Serial No. PCT/GB2020/050063 (0210). [cited by applicant]
Laosai et al., Acute Leukemia Classification by Using SVM and K-Means Clustering, 2014 Proceedings of the International Electrical Engineering Congress (IEECON), pp. 1-4 (Mar. 19, 2014). [cited by applicant]
Lee, et al., Human Airway Measurement from CT Images. In Medical Imaging 2008: Computer-Aided Diagnosis, Proc. SPIE 6915:386-383 (Mar. 2008). [cited by applicant]
Litjens, et al., A Survey on Deep Learning in Medical Image Analysis, Medical Image Analysis, 42:60-88 (Dec. 2017). [cited by applicant]
Milletari, et al., V-Net: Fully Convolutional Neural networks For Volumetric Medical Image Segmentation, arXiv preprint arXiv: 1606.04797 (Jun. 2016). [cited by applicant]
Monteiro et al., “Conditional Random Fields as Recurrent Neural Networks for 3D Medical Imaging Segmentation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1807.07464, (Jul. 2019). [cited by applicant]
Mortensen et al., “Semantic Segmentation of Mixed Crops Using Deep Convolutional Neural Network,” ClGr-AgEng Conference, pp. 26-29, (Jun. 2016). [cited by applicant]
Rogowska, et al., Overview and Fundamentals of Medical Image Segmentation, Handbook of Medical Imaging, Processing and Analysis, pp. 69-85 (Oct. 2000). [cited by applicant]
Schmauss D., et al., “Three-Dimensional Printing in Cardiac Surgery and Interventional Cardiology: A Single-Centre Experience,” European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, Aug. 26, 2014, vol. 47(6), pp. 1044-1052. [cited by applicant]
Yu, et al., 3D FractalNet: Dense Volumetric Segmentation for Cardiovascular MRI Volumes, In Reconstruction, Segmentation, and Analysis of Medical Images, pp. 103-110 (Oct. 2016). [cited by applicant]
Yu, et al., 3D FractaNet: dense volumetric segmentation for cardiovascular MRI Volumes. In Reconstruction, Segmentation, and Analysis of Medical Images. First International Workshops, RAMBO 2016 and HVSMR 2016. Held in … [cited by applicant]
Zhou, et al., Deep convolutional neural network for segmentation of knee joint anatomy, Mag. Reson. Med., 80(6):2759-2770 (Dec. 2018). [cited by applicant]
Zhuang, J., “Laddernet: Multi-Path Networks based on U-Net For Medical Image Segmentation,” arXiv:preprint arXiv:1810.07810., pp. 1-4, (Oct. 2018). [cited by applicant]
Cited By (1)
US 12,725,709