Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Open access Jurnal SINTA 1

Comparison of Three Segmentation Methods for Breast Ultrasound Images based on Level Set and Morphological Operations

International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IJECE) · Vol. 7 No. 1 (2017)

DOI
10.11591/ijece.v7i1.pp383-391
ISSN
2088-8708, 2088-8708
Published
2017-02-01
Publisher
Institute of Advanced Engineering and Science
License
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0

Abstract

Breast cancer is one of the major causes of death among women all over the world. The most frequently used diagnosis tool to detect breast cancer is ultrasound. However, to segment the breast ultrasound images is a difficult thing. Some studies show that the active contour models have been proved to be the most successful methods for medical image segmentation. The level set method is a class of curve evolution methods based on the geometric active contour model. Morphological operation describes a range of image processing technique that deal with the shape of features in an image. Morphological operations are applied to remove imperfections that introduced during segmentation. In this paper, we have evaluated three level set methods that combined with morphological operations to segment the breast lesions. The level set methods that used in our research are the Chan Vese (C-V) model, the Selective Binary and Gaussian Filtering Regularized Level Set (SBGFRLS) model and the Distance Regularized Level Set Evolution (DRLSE) model. Furthermore, to evaluate the method, we compared the segmented breast lesion that obtained by each method with the lesion that obtained manually by radiologists. The evaluation is done by four metrics: Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC), True-Positive Ratio (TPR), True-Negative Ratio (TNR), and Accuracy (ACC). Our experimental results with 30 breast ultrasound images showed that the C-V model that combined with morphological operations have better performance than the other two methods according to mean value of DSC metrics.

Collaboration network of the authors

23 authors · 53 co-authorship links · 11 across different organisations

Hover or tap a name to highlight its co-authors. Double-click to open the author's page.

  • Gunadarma University
  • Universitas Putra Indonesia "YPTK"
  • University of Indonesia
  • Universitas Baiturrahmah
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Different organisations
  • Same organisation
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Thicker line = more joint articles · bigger circle = more articles
Show as table
Co-authorOrganisationJoint articles
Achmad FahruroziGunadarma University4
Djati KeramiUniversity of Indonesia4
Rodiah RodiahGunadarma University3
Suryarini WidodoGunadarma University2
Fitrianingsih FitrianingsihGunadarma University2
Diana Tri SusetianingtiasGunadarma University1
RodiahGunadarma University1
Rini AriantyGunadarma University1
Jufriadif Na’amUniversitas Putra Indonesia "YPTK"1
Johan HarlanGunadarma University1
Julius SantonyUniversitas Putra Indonesia "YPTK"1
Catur SuharintoUniversitas Baiturrahmah1
Trini SaptarianiGunadarma University1
Sarifudin MadendaAffiliation unknown1
Widya SilfiantiGunadarma University1
Ety SutantyGunadarma University1
Dewi Agushinta RGunadarma University1
Diana Tri SusetianigtiasAffiliation unknown1
Rifki KosasihGunadarma University1

Affiliations come from OpenAlex; journal OAI-PMH metadata carries none. Authors without an OpenAlex ID are matched by name, which can merge or split people.

This record comes from Crossref (what the publisher deposited), because the journal's own OAI-PMH endpoint could not be harvested.

Metadata source: Crossref API (cadangan, berdasarkan ISSN) https://api.crossref.org/journals/2088-8708/works, first harvested 27 Okt 2026, last seen 27 Okt 2026.
Metadata as oai_dc, converted from Crossref
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/"><dc:title>Comparison of Three Segmentation Methods for Breast Ultrasound Images based on Level Set and  Morphological Operations</dc:title><dc:creator>Lestari, Dewi Putrie</dc:creator><dc:creator>Madenda, Sarifuddin</dc:creator><dc:creator>Ernastuti, Ernastuti</dc:creator><dc:creator>Wibowo, Eri Prasetyo</dc:creator><dc:description>&lt;jats:p&gt;Breast cancer is one of the major causes of death among women all over the world. The most frequently used diagnosis tool to detect breast cancer is ultrasound. However, to segment the breast ultrasound images is a difficult thing. Some studies show that the active contour models have been proved to be the most successful methods for medical image segmentation. The level set method is a class of curve evolution methods based on the geometric active contour model. Morphological operation describes a range of image processing technique that deal with the shape of features in an image. Morphological operations are applied to remove imperfections that introduced during segmentation. In this paper, we have evaluated three level set methods that combined with morphological operations to segment the breast lesions. The level set methods that used in our research are the Chan Vese (C-V) model, the Selective Binary and Gaussian Filtering Regularized Level Set (SBGFRLS) model and the Distance Regularized Level Set Evolution (DRLSE) model. Furthermore, to evaluate the method, we compared the segmented breast lesion that obtained by each method with the lesion that obtained manually by radiologists. The evaluation is done by four metrics: Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC), True-Positive Ratio (TPR), True-Negative Ratio (TNR), and Accuracy (ACC). Our experimental results with 30 breast ultrasound images showed that the C-V model that combined with morphological operations have better performance than the other two methods according to mean value of DSC metrics.&lt;/jats:p&gt;</dc:description><dc:publisher>Institute of Advanced Engineering and Science</dc:publisher><dc:date>2017-02-01</dc:date><dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type><dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format><dc:identifier>https://doi.org/10.11591/ijece.v7i1.pp383-391</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>10.11591/ijece.v7i1.pp383-391</dc:identifier><dc:source>International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IJECE); Vol 7 No 1 (2017); 383</dc:source><dc:source>2088-8708</dc:source><dc:source>2088-8708</dc:source><dc:relation>http://ijece.iaescore.com/index.php/IJECE/article/viewFile/6291/6036</dc:relation><dc:rights>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0</dc:rights></oai_dc:dc>