fidopt Interactive view

Micro-ultrasound prostate

A transrectal micro-ultrasound sweep of the prostate before a biopsy: the frames of the probe's rotation stacked, the prostate outlined on each and reviewed by an expert urologist (Micro-Ultrasound Prostate Segmentation Dataset).

10 test casesprostateimage US
Read before comparing (10)
  • Pool. 75 men biopsied under 29 MHz micro-ultrasound at the University of Florida by one surgeon, the probe turned by hand from left to right. No other dataset of the corpus holds micro-ultrasound.
  • Stack. Each frame is a pseudo-sagittal plane through the probe's axis, the next turned about it: a fan, not parallel slices. A file holds 21 to 45 frames, 30 to 45 on the test cases; how the released frames were chosen is not said.
  • Pixel. The headers say 1 x 1 mm. The device's image fills the frame in one of three ways, about 28, 38 or 48 mm deep; prepare.py gives each sweep 46.08 mm over the columns its image fills: 0.033586, 0.039520 or 0.049924 mm (8, 2 and 0 test cases). The provider's code takes 0.033586 mm for all, shortening the deeper kinds' distances by 15 and 33%.
  • Rotation. The third axis is the probe's rotation, 4 degrees between frames in the headers of the training and 9 test sweeps. The 11 other test sweeps say 1, a slip their outlines show; prepare.py gives every sweep a step of 4.
  • Distances. Millimetres within a frame, not across frames: neighbouring frames lie about 1.4 mm apart 20 mm from the probe's axis and 2.8 mm at 40 mm, but the corpus stacks them 4 mm apart as if parallel. So HD95 counts 4 mm a frame, more than it is, and the 1 mm surface Dice measures the outlines frame by frame.
  • Values. The archive's, 0 to 254, black margins included. The axes carry no anatomy: the columns run along the probe in an order not given, the rows in depth.
  • Truth. In 3D Slicer a beginner outlined the capsule, an intermediate annotator corrected it, and an expert urologist reviewed every frame and edited what was off until the three agreed: graded expert. The archive's non-expert annotations of the training patients are the beginner's first outlines, not a second reading.
  • Readers. A medical student, a master's student and a urologist with one year of micro-ultrasound also outlined the test patients. Against the expert on the 10 test cases they score a Dice of 0.89, 0.93 and 0.94, an HD95 of 4.3, 3.3 and 3.2 mm and a surface Dice of 0.69, 0.80 and 0.84. A method should not be expected far past that.
  • Flaws. On test_06 the expert outlines about 50 mm² on the first eight frames, seven of which the other readers leave empty. Outlines run into the black margins on 9 of the 10 test cases. On test_02, test_06, test_08, test_17 and test_20 the outline follows the top of the field, not the capsule; on test_20 the sweep stops inside the gland.
  • Outside numbers. None: the paper scores each frame in 2D with one pixel size over all 20 test patients; the corpus scores the stack in 3D on 10. The test patients' expert outlines are public: the paper's models never saw them, but a model trained on the whole archive may have.

No method has a result on every case of this dataset yet.

Case by case

Click a score to look at that result: the image, the truth in green and the method's map in red. Underlined scores have their image; for the others you see the case without the result.

About the data

The first test case of Micro-ultrasound prostate
The first test caseClick to look at every case.
Test cases
10 test patients drawn with seed 2026 among the provider's 20 test patients, and 10 development patients among its 55 training patients. One sweep a patient, so no patient is on both sides.
Truth
contours by experts the prostate capsule outlined on every frame of the stack by two non-expert annotators, each frame reviewed and edited by an expert urologist until all three agreed: the dataset's expert annotations
Licence
CC BY 4.0
10 cases for tuning, never tested

train_39, train_33, train_26, train_09, train_40, train_43, train_28, train_52, train_41, train_10