Nils Gessert1, Marcel Bengs2, Lukas Wittig3, Daniel Drömann3, Tobias Keck4, Alexander Schlaefer2, David B Ellebrecht4. 1. Institute of Medical Technology, Hamburg University of Technology, Hamburg, Germany. nils.gessert@tuhh.de. 2. Institute of Medical Technology, Hamburg University of Technology, Hamburg, Germany. 3. Department of Pulmology, University Medical Centre Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany. 4. Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The gold standard for colorectal cancer metastases detection in the peritoneum is histological evaluation of a removed tissue sample. For feedback during interventions, real-time in vivo imaging with confocal laser microscopy has been proposed for differentiation of benign and malignant tissue by manual expert evaluation. Automatic image classification could improve the surgical workflow further by providing immediate feedback. METHODS: We analyze the feasibility of classifying tissue from confocal laser microscopy in the colon and peritoneum. For this purpose, we adopt both classical and state-of-the-art convolutional neural networks to directly learn from the images. As the available dataset is small, we investigate several transfer learning strategies including partial freezing variants and full fine-tuning. We address the distinction of different tissue types, as well as benign and malignant tissue. RESULTS: We present a thorough analysis of transfer learning strategies for colorectal cancer with confocal laser microscopy. In the peritoneum, metastases are classified with an AUC of 97.1, and in the colon the primarius is classified with an AUC of 73.1. In general, transfer learning substantially improves performance over training from scratch. We find that the optimal transfer learning strategy differs for models and classification tasks. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that convolutional neural networks and transfer learning can be used to identify cancer tissue with confocal laser microscopy. We show that there is no generally optimal transfer learning strategy and model as well as task-specific engineering is required. Given the high performance for the peritoneum, even with a small dataset, application for intraoperative decision support could be feasible.
PURPOSE: The gold standard for colorectal cancer metastases detection in the peritoneum is histological evaluation of a removed tissue sample. For feedback during interventions, real-time in vivo imaging with confocal laser microscopy has been proposed for differentiation of benign and malignant tissue by manual expert evaluation. Automatic image classification could improve the surgical workflow further by providing immediate feedback. METHODS: We analyze the feasibility of classifying tissue from confocal laser microscopy in the colon and peritoneum. For this purpose, we adopt both classical and state-of-the-art convolutional neural networks to directly learn from the images. As the available dataset is small, we investigate several transfer learning strategies including partial freezing variants and full fine-tuning. We address the distinction of different tissue types, as well as benign and malignant tissue. RESULTS: We present a thorough analysis of transfer learning strategies for colorectal cancer with confocal laser microscopy. In the peritoneum, metastases are classified with an AUC of 97.1, and in the colon the primarius is classified with an AUC of 73.1. In general, transfer learning substantially improves performance over training from scratch. We find that the optimal transfer learning strategy differs for models and classification tasks. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that convolutional neural networks and transfer learning can be used to identify cancer tissue with confocal laser microscopy. We show that there is no generally optimal transfer learning strategy and model as well as task-specific engineering is required. Given the high performance for the peritoneum, even with a small dataset, application for intraoperative decision support could be feasible.
Authors: Marc Aubreville; Maike Stoeve; Nicolai Oetter; Miguel Goncalves; Christian Knipfer; Helmut Neumann; Christopher Bohr; Florian Stelzle; Andreas Maier Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2018-08-04 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Nils Gessert; Matthias Lutz; Markus Heyder; Sarah Latus; David M Leistner; Youssef S Abdelwahed; Alexander Schlaefer Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2018-08-16 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Nima Tajbakhsh; Jae Y Shin; Suryakanth R Gurudu; R Todd Hurst; Christopher B Kendall; Michael B Gotway Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2016-03-07 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Andre Esteva; Brett Kuprel; Roberto A Novoa; Justin Ko; Susan M Swetter; Helen M Blau; Sebastian Thrun Journal: Nature Date: 2017-01-25 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: David Benjamin Ellebrecht; Christiane Kuempers; Marco Horn; Tobias Keck; Markus Kleemann Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2018-09-21 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Clarisse Dromain; Sophie Leboulleux; Anne Auperin; Diane Goere; David Malka; Jean Lumbroso; Martin Schumberger; Robert Sigal; Dominique Elias Journal: Abdom Imaging Date: 2008 Jan-Feb
Authors: Marc Aubreville; Christian Knipfer; Nicolai Oetter; Christian Jaremenko; Erik Rodner; Joachim Denzler; Christopher Bohr; Helmut Neumann; Florian Stelzle; Andreas Maier Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-09-20 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Lei Tian; Brady Hunt; Muyinatu A Lediju Bell; Ji Yi; Jason T Smith; Marien Ochoa; Xavier Intes; Nicholas J Durr Journal: Lasers Surg Med Date: 2021-05-20