[Insight-developers] PhysicalObjects for defining anatomical context

[Peter Ratiu]

Does anyone's code use such parameters? I have been working for a while now
on defining such generic relationships between subjects. I am using the VHM
and VHF to consistently map homologous regions and landmarks. I am doing
this for anatomical reasons, but I was thinking about the possibility to
define broad boundaries for various structures and derive incremental rules
such as: 
A) if this is within less then 20 mm from the kidney, it cannot be the
bladder. This seems coarse, but next, we the next step would be
B) if on the left, it must be spleen, if on the right must be liver.
C) if liver, and the superior boundary is not straight (I.e. Incomplete data
set, we must find diaphragm, and next left lung, etc.

One of the validation methodologies I proposed also uses this principle, at
a more refined level. If anyone is interested in this approach, please let
me know.
Peter


> 
> At 09:34 AM 11/27/2001 -0500, Luis Ibanez wrote:
>> 
>> PhysicalObjects are oriented to support processes like:
>> 
>> - defining anatomical context for image analysis:
>>  e.g. when looking for a Liver in a CT we can start by
>>  identifying the spine, place a 3D model there, then move
>>  on to identifying the ribs and place rib 3D models there,
>>  .... and so on. It is well known that radiolgist identify
>>  structures by their context.  e.g something it may look like
>>  a liver... but it if not in the right place it should not
>>  be a liver.
>>