Back

Spectral organ fingerprints for intraoperative tissue classification with hyperspectral imaging

Studier-Fischer, A.; Seidlitz, S.; Sellner, J.; Wiesenfarth, M.; Ayala, L.; Oezdemir, B.; Odenthal, J.; Knoedler, S.; Kowalewski, K.-F.; Haney, C. M.; Camplisson, I.; Dietrich, M.; Schmidt, K.; Salg, G.; Kenngott, H. G.; Adler, T. J.; Schreck, N.; Kopp-Schneider, A.; Maier-Hein, K.; Maier-Hein, L.; Mueller-Stich, B. P.; Nickel, F.

2021-11-25 bioinformatics
10.1101/2021.11.24.469943 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Visual discrimination of tissue during surgery can be challenging since different tissues appear similar to the human eye. Hyperspectral imaging (HSI) removes this limitation by associating each pixel with high-dimensional spectral information. While previous work has shown its general potential to discriminate tissue, clinical translation has been limited due to the methods current lack of robustness and generalizability. Specifically, it had been unknown whether variability in spectral reflectance is primarily explained by tissue type rather than the recorded individual or specific acquisition conditions. The contribution of this work is threefold: (1) Based on an annotated medical HSI data set (9,059 images from 46 pigs), we present a tissue atlas featuring spectral fingerprints of 20 different porcine organs and tissue types. (2) Using the principle of mixed model analysis, we show that the greatest source of variability related to HSI images is the organ under observation. (3) We show that HSI-based fully-automatic tissue differentiation of 20 organ classes with deep neural networks is possible with high accuracy (> 95 %). We conclude from our study that automatic tissue discrimination based on HSI data is feasible and could thus aid in intraoperative decision making and pave the way for context-aware computer-assisted surgery systems and autonomous robotics.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.