Page 50 - AIH-2-1
P. 50

Artificial Intelligence in Health                       Asymmetric U-Net for enhanced spinal MRI segmentation



            finer features across different depths. The key contributions   Table 1. Reclassified pixel values for segmentation
            of this study are as follows:
            (1)  Optimization of multi-scale skip connection paths:   Vertebral bone  Intervertebral disc  Background regions
               By refining these paths, we can better control model   (100 100 100)  (255 255 255)  (0 0 0)
               parameters while ensuring high segmentation
               accuracy.                                       biases and ensures that the training dataset captures a
            (2)  Increased network depth in the upsampling process:   comprehensive range of variations present in the images.
               This modification enables the model to reconstruct   Each input spine image is standardized to a size of 512
               complex  structures  and  details  more  accurately,   × 512 pixels to maintain consistency and optimize the
               enhancing overall precision.                    computational efficiency during model training. Figure 1
            (3)  Introduction  of  residual  connections:  These  shows an example of an original spinal MRI image and its
               connections are incorporated locally to mitigate the   corresponding label image, illustrating the visual clarity
               problem  of  gradient  vanishing,  accelerate  training,   and distinct boundaries of the segmented regions.
               and strengthen the network’s feature learning and
               representation capabilities.                    2.2. J-Unet architecture

              In summary, the proposed method addresses the    The J-Unet architecture introduced in this study represents
            challenges of excessive training time and model accuracy   a significant evolution from traditional U-Net and U-Net3+
            in spine MRI segmentation. By optimizing the architecture   designs,  addressing  some  of  the  limitations  inherent  in
            of U-Net++, we aim  to provide a  more efficient and   these models and incorporating advanced features to
            precise tool for medical professionals, thereby improving   enhance performance in spine MRI image segmentation.
            diagnostic and treatment outcomes for spinal diseases.  Figure 2 illustrates the architecture of the proposed J-Unet,
                                                               highlighting  the  innovative  structural  elements  that
            2. Data and methods                                differentiate it from its predecessors.
            In this section, the dataset used in this study and the   2.2.1. Asymmetric network architecture
            processing methods employed are introduced. A detailed
            description of the proposed J-Unet architecture, designed   One of the most notable advancements in the J-Unet model
            specifically for spine MRI image segmentation, is also   is its asymmetric network architecture, which diverges
            provided.                                          from traditional U-Net structures by extending the
                                                               upsampling pathway with three additional layers compared
            2.1. Dataset and processing methods                to its downsampling counterpart. This asymmetry is
            The dataset utilized in this study consists of T2-weighted   deliberately engineered  to enhance  the  network’s  ability
            MRI scans obtained from a cohort of 215 patients, sourced   to capture and reconstruct complex, hierarchical features
            from multiple medical institutions to ensure diversity and   more comprehensively. By increasing the depth on the
            robustness in the data. 28,29  All images are provided in Nifti   upsampling  side, the model can progressively refine the
            format, a widely recognized standard for medical imaging,   spatial resolution of the feature maps, thereby improving
            which facilitates comprehensive 3D visualization and   the accuracy of the segmentation output.
            analysis.                                            In this design, the input and output channels of
              Initially, the dataset’s labels included 21 distinct pixel   these additional upsampling layers are set to 120,
            values representing various anatomical structures and   effectively reducing the number of parameters without
            features. For the purposes of this study, these original   compromising accuracy. The advantages of an asymmetric
            labels were reclassified into three primary categories:   network architecture are evident in its enhanced ability
            vertebral bone, intervertebral disc, and background   to precisely reconstruct complex structures and details.
            regions.  This  reclassification  simplifies  the  segmentation   Traditional symmetric architectures often struggle with
            task, focusing on the most clinically relevant structures.   images characterized by irregular shapes and intricate
            The reclassified pixel values for segmentation are detailed   edges. By increasing the depth on the upsampling side, the
            in  Table 1, providing a clear framework for subsequent   asymmetric network better adapts to these complexities.
            image processing and analysis.                     It also utilizes skip connections between specific scales
                                                               to fine-tune model parameters while maintaining
              We configured the training and validation datasets
            with a 4:1 ratio. To ensure a balanced and representative   segmentation accuracy.
            distribution of  data, the  allocation  was  performed   The depth of the upsampling pathway in the J-Unet
            through random sampling, which mitigates potential   is crucial for reconstructing the finer details of spinal


            Volume 2 Issue 1 (2025)                         44                               doi: 10.36922/aih.3889
   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55