IP Library Granted Patent US 12,450,736
Granted Patent B2
US 12,450,736 · App. 17/922,809 · Granted Oct 21, 2025

Identifying abnormal images in set of medical images based on combined feature set with global features extracted using first CNN and local features extracted using second CNN analyzing high resolution image patches

Inventors: Vidya Madapusi Srinivas Prasad (Bangalore, IN); Srinivasa Rao Kundeti (Movva, IN); Manikanda Krishnan V (Bangalore, IN); Vijayananda Jagannatha (Bangalore, IN)
Assignee: KONINKLIJKE PHLIPS N.V.
G06T7/0012G06T3/4053G06V10/42G06V10/44G06V10/764G06V10/774G06V10/82G16H30/40G16H50/20G06T2207/10116G06T2207/20081G06T2207/20084G06T2207/30004G06V2201/031
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 12,450,736
App. No.
17/922,809
Granted
Oct 21, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Disclosed herein is a method and system for identifying abnormal images in a set of medical images for optimal assessment of the medical images. A plurality of global features from each medical image is extracted based on pretrained weights associated with each global feature. Similarly, plurality of local features from each medical image is extracted analyzing a predefined number of image patches generated from a higher resolution image corresponding to each medical image. Further, an abnormality score for each medical image is determined based on weights associated with a combined feature set obtained by concatenating the plurality of global features and the plurality of local features. Thereafter, the medical image is identified as an abnormal image when the abnormality score of the medical image is higher than a predefined first threshold score.

Claims (49)

1. A computer-implemented method of identifying abnormal images in a set of medical images for optimal assessment of the medical images, the method comprising:

extracting a plurality of global features from each medical image of the set of medical images based on pretrained weights associated with each of the plurality of global features, wherein the global features are assigned the pretrained weights using a first Convolutional Neural Network (CNN);

extracting, using a second Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) different from the first CNN, a plurality of local features from each medical image by analysing a predefined number of image patches corresponding to each medical image, wherein the predefined number of image patches are generated by obtaining a higher resolution image corresponding to each medical image and splitting each higher resolution image into the predefined number of image patches, wherein the respective image patches are analyzed to extract local features from the respective image patches, and wherein the extracted local features for the respective image patches are combined to obtain the plurality of local features, wherein a resolution of the medical image is less than a resolution of the higher resolution image;

determining an abnormality score for each medical image based on weights associated with a combined feature set obtained by concatenating the plurality of global features and the plurality of local features, wherein the abnormality score is determined using a pretrained feature classifier; and

identifying the medical image as an abnormal image when the abnormality score of the medical image is higher than a predefined first threshold score.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the plurality of global features and the plurality of local features are extracted using a pretrained feature extraction model.

3. The method of claim 2 , wherein training the feature extraction model comprises:

obtaining a plurality of train medical images;

extracting ground truth labels corresponding to each of the plurality of train medical images, wherein the ground truth labels comprises one or more system-assigned ground truth labels and corresponding one or more expert-assigned labels;

comparing the one or more system-assigned ground truth labels with the corresponding one or more expert-assigned labels to determine the image classes having consensus;

extracting one or more system-predicted ground truth labels from image classes having no consensus;

comparing the one or more system-predicted ground truth labels with the corresponding system-assigned ground truth labels to determine train medical images having matching ground truth labels; and

providing the one or more matching ground truth labels and the corresponding train medical images for training the feature extraction model.

4. The method of claim 1 , wherein determining the abnormality score for each medical image comprises comparing the weights associated with the combined feature set with corresponding stored weights associated with the pretrained feature classifier.

5. The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

classifying the abnormal image as a critical abnormal image when the abnormality score of the image is more than a predefined second threshold score, wherein the predefined second threshold score is greater than the predefined first threshold score; and

classifying the abnormal image as a challenging abnormal image when the abnormality score of the abnormal image is more than the predefined first threshold score and less than the predefined second threshold score.

6. The method of claim 1 , wherein identifying the abnormal image further comprises:

dynamically creating a worklist comprising each of the abnormal images; and

assigning the worklist to an expert analyst for assessment of the abnormal images including one or more critical abnormal images and one or more challenging abnormal images.

7. The method of claim 6 , wherein each of the one or more challenging abnormal images are provided to an expert analyst for assessment and each of the one or more critical abnormal images are flagged as priority and provided to the expert analyst for immediate assessment.

8. An automated assessment system for identifying abnormal images in a set of medical images for optimal assessment of the medical images, the automated system comprising:

a processor; and

a memory, communicatively coupled to the processor, wherein the memory stores processor-executable instructions, which on execution, cause the processor to:

extract a plurality of global features from each medical image of the set of medical images based on pretrained weights associated with each of the plurality of global features;

extract, using a second Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) different from the first CNN, a plurality of local features from each medical image by analysing a predefined number of image patches corresponding to each medical image, wherein the predefined number of image patches are generated by obtaining a higher resolution image corresponding to each medical image and splitting each higher resolution image into the predefined number of image patches, wherein the respective image patches are analyzed to extract local features from the respective image patches, and wherein the extracted local features for the respective image patches are combined to obtain the plurality of local features, wherein a resolution of the medical image is less than a resolution of the higher resolution image;

determine an abnormality score for each medical image based on weights associated with a combined feature set obtained by concatenating the plurality of global features and the plurality of local features, wherein the abnormality score is determined using a pretrained feature classifier; and

identify the medical image as an abnormal image when the abnormality score of the medical image is higher than a predefined first threshold score.

9. The automated assessment system of claim 8 , wherein the plurality of global features and the plurality of local features are extracted using a pretrained feature extraction model.

10. The automated assessment system of claim 9 , wherein the processor trains the feature extraction model by:

obtaining a plurality of train medical images;

extracting ground truth labels corresponding to each of the plurality of train medical images, wherein the ground truth labels comprises one or more system-assigned ground truth labels and corresponding one or more expert-assigned labels;

comparing the one or more system-assigned ground truth labels with the corresponding one or more expert-assigned labels to determine the image classes having consensus;

extracting one or more system-predicted ground truth labels from image classes not having consensus;

comparing the one or more system-predicted ground truth labels with the corresponding system-assigned ground truth labels to determine one or more images having matching ground truth labels; and

providing the one or more matching ground truth labels and corresponding the train medical images for training the feature extraction model.

11. The automated assessment system of claim 8 , wherein the processor determines the abnormality score for each medical image by comparing the weights associated with the combined feature set with corresponding stored weights associated with the pretrained feature classifier.

12. The automated assessment system of claim 8 , wherein the processor is further configured to:

classify the abnormal image as a critical abnormal image when the abnormality score of the image is more than a predefined second threshold score, wherein the predefined second threshold score is greater than the predefined first threshold score; and

classify the abnormal image as a challenging abnormal image when the abnormality score of the abnormal image is more than the predefined first threshold score and less than the predefined second threshold score.

13. The automated assessment system of claim 8 , wherein identifying the abnormal image further comprises:

dynamically creating a worklist comprising each abnormal image; and

assigning the worklist to an expert analyst for assessment of the abnormal images including one or more critical abnormal images and one or more challenging abnormal images.

14. The automated assessment system of claim 13 , wherein each of the one or more challenging abnormal images are provided to an expert analyst for assessment and each of the one or more critical abnormal images are flagged as priority and provided to the expert analyst for immediate assessment.

15. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to identify abnormal images in a set of medical images for optimal assessment of the medical images, comprising:

extracting a plurality of global features from each medical image of the set of medical images based on pretrained weights associated with each of the plurality of global features, wherein the global features are assigned the pretrained weights using a first Convolutional Neural Network (CNN);

extracting, using a second Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) different from the first CNN, a plurality of local features from each medical image by analysing a predefined number of image patches corresponding to each medical image, wherein the predefined number of image patches are generated by obtaining a higher resolution image corresponding to each medical image and splitting each higher resolution image into the predefined number of image patches, wherein the respective image patches are analyzed to extract local features from the respective image patches, and wherein the extracted local features for the respective image patches are combined to obtain the plurality of local features, wherein a resolution of the medical image is less than a resolution of the higher resolution image;

determining an abnormality score for each medical image based on weights associated with a combined feature set obtained by concatenating the plurality of global features and the plurality of local features, wherein the abnormality score is determined using a pretrained feature classifier; and

identifying the medical image as an abnormal image when the abnormality score of the medical image is higher than a predefined first threshold score.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Nov 2, 2022
From: PRASAD, VIDYA MADAPUSI SRINIVAS; KUNDETI, SRINIVASA RAO; V, MANIKANDA KRISHNAN; JAGANNATHA, VIJAYANANDA
To: KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V.
Reel/Frame 061626/0103 →
Priority Claims (1)
EP 20173286 · May 6, 2020 · regional
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20230334656A1 · Oct 19, 2023
References Cited (51)
US 7054473B1 · Roehrig · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 10413236B2 · Aoyagi · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 10929708B2 · Syeda-Mahmood · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 11776117B2 · Guendel · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 11797647B2 · Laserson · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 12100192B2 · Bai · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 20090252395A1 · Chan · 2009 [cited by examiner]
US 20160035078A1 · Lin · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170147868A1 · Sun · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20220318565A1 · Laserson · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20230274439A1 · Preuhs · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20240062367A1 · Vdovjak · 2024 [cited by examiner]
CN 110472676A · 2019 [cited by applicant]
KR 20230060260A · 2023 [cited by examiner]
KR 20230147591A · 2023 [cited by examiner]
Lopes, U. K., and João Francisco Valiati. “Pre-trained convolutional neural networks as feature extractors for tuberculosis detection.” Computers in biology and medicine 89, pp. 135-143 (Year: 2017). [cited by examiner]
Tang, Yu-Xing, et al. “Automated abnormality classification of chest radiographs using deep convolutional neural networks.” NPJ digital medicine 3(1), p. 70 (Year: 2020). [cited by examiner]
Anwar, Syed Muhammad, et al. “Medical image analysis using convolutional neural networks: a review.” Journal of medical systems 42, pp. 1-13. (Year: 2018). [cited by examiner]
Yu, Hang, et al. “Convolutional neural networks for medical image analysis: state-of-the-art, comparisons, improvement and perspectives.” Neurocomputing 444, pp. 92-110. (Year: 2021). [cited by examiner]
International Search Report and Written Opinion Dated Jul. 15, 2021 For International Application No. PCT/EP2021/061525 Filed May 3, 2021. [cited by applicant]
Shaffie, et al: “A New System for Lung Cancer Diagnosis based on the Integration of Global and Local CT Features”, 2019 IEEE International Conference on Imaging Systems and Techniques, Dec. 9, 2019. [cited by applicant]
Li, et al: “Deformation and Refined Features Based Lesion Detection on Chest X-Ray”, IEEE Access, vol. 8, Jan. 2, 2020. [cited by applicant]
Zhang, et al.: “DP2 Block: An Improved Multi-Scale Block for Pulmonary Nodule Detection”, 2020 IEEE 17th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging Workshops, Apr. 4, 2020. [cited by applicant]
Kamnitsas, et al: “Efficient Multi-Scale 3D CNN with Fully Connected CRF for Accurate Brain Lesion Segmentation”, Medical Image Analysis, 2016. [cited by applicant]
Litjens, et al: “A survey on deep learning in medical image analysis”, Medical Image Analysis 42 (2017) 60-88. [cited by applicant]
Song: “Accurate Segmentation of Cervical Cytoplasm and Nuclei Based on Multiscale Convolutional Network and Graph”, IEEE Transactions On Biomedical Engineering, vol. 62, No. 10, Oct. 2015. [cited by applicant]
Dong, et al: “Chest X-Ray Images from 16000+ Examples Using CNN”, Connected Health: Applications, Systems and Engineering Technologies (CHASE), 2017 IEEE/ACM International Conference, Jul. 2017. [cited by applicant]
Guan, et al: “Diagnose like a radiologist: Attention guided convolutional neural network for thorax disease classification”, CoRR, vol. abs/1801.09927, 2018. [cited by applicant]
Huang, et al: “Densely connected convolutional networks”, Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. Vol. 1. No. 2. (2017). [cited by applicant]
Van Griethuysen, et al: “Computational radiomics system to decode the radiographic phenotype”, Cancer research 77.21 (2017): e104-e107. [cited by applicant]
Jaeger, et al: “Two public chest X-ray datasets for computer-aided screening of pulmonary dis- eases”, Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery 4, No. 6: 475., 2014. [cited by applicant]
Shiraishi, et al: “Development of a digital image database for chest radiographs with and without a lung nodule: receiver operating characteristic analysis of radiologists' detection of pulmonary nodules”, American Jour… [cited by applicant]
Wang, et al: “Lung nodule classification using deep feature fusion in chest radiography”, Computerized Medical Imaging and Graphics 57 (2017) 10-18. [cited by applicant]
Campadelli, et al: “Lung field segmentation in digital postero-anterior chest radiographs”, Pattern Recognition and Image Analysis, Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2005) 736-745. [cited by applicant]
Quekel, et al: “Miss rate of lung cancer on the chest radiograph in clinical practice”, Chest 115 (1999) 720-724. [cited by applicant]
Robinson, et al: “Variation between experienced observers in the interpretation of accident and emergency radiographs”, The British journal of radiology 72 (1999) 323-330. [cited by applicant]
Kundel: “Perception errors in chest radiography. In: Seminars in Respiratory Medicine”, vol. 10., Copyright 1989 by Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc. (1989) 203-210. [cited by applicant]
Renfrew, et al: “Error in radiology: classification and lessons in 182 cases presented at a problem case conference”, . Radiology 183 (1992) 145-150. [cited by applicant]
Jackson, W.L.: “In radiology, turnaround time is king”, (2015) https://www.diagnosticimaging.com/view/radiology-turnaround-time-king. [cited by applicant]
He, et al: “Deep residual learning for image recognition”, Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. (2016) 770-778. [cited by applicant]
Krizhevsky, et al: “ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In: Advances in neural Information processing systems”, (2012) 1097-1105. [cited by applicant]
Shin, et al: “Learning to read chest x-rays: Recurrent neural cascade model for automated image annotation”, In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. (2016) 2497-2506. [cited by applicant]
Zhu, et al: “Deep multi-instance networks with sparse label assignment for whole mammogram classification” . In: International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention, Springer (2017) 60… [cited by applicant]
Rajpurkar, et al: “Chexnet: Radiologist-level pneumonia detection on chest x-rays with deep learning”, arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.05225 (2017). [cited by applicant]
Wang, et al: “Chestx-ray8: Hospital-scale chest x-ray database and benchmarks on weakly-supervised classification and localization of common thorax diseases”, In: 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Reco… [cited by applicant]
Hwang, et al: “Self-transfer learning for fully weakly supervised object localization”, arXiv preprint arXiv:1602.01625 (2016). [cited by applicant]
Islam, et al: “Abnormality detection and localization in chest x-rays using deep convolutional neural networks”, arXiv preprint arXiv:1705.09850 (2017). [cited by applicant]
Kumar, et al: “Boosted cascaded convnets for multilabel classification of thoracic diseases in chest radiographs”, In: International Conference Image Analysis and Recognition, Springer (2018) 546-552. [cited by applicant]
Kumar, et al: “Distinguishing normal and pulmonary edema chest x-ray using gabor filter and svm”, In: Bioelectronics and Bioinformatics (ISBB), 2014 IEEE International Symposium on, IEEE (2014) 1-4. [cited by applicant]
Kingma, et al: “A method for stochastic optimization”, . arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980 (2014). [cited by applicant]
Selvaraju, et al: “Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-Based Localization” ICCV. 2017. [cited by applicant]