| Literature DB >> 32293466 |
Daniele M S Barros1, Julio C C Moura2, Cefas R Freire2, Alexandre C Taleb3, Ricardo A M Valentim2, Philippi S G Morais2.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This is a systematic review on the main algorithms using machine learning (ML) in retinal image processing for glaucoma diagnosis and detection. ML has proven to be a significant tool for the development of computer aided technology. Furthermore, secondary research has been widely conducted over the years for ophthalmologists. Such aspects indicate the importance of ML in the context of retinal image processing.Entities:
Keywords: Classification; Deep learning; Glaucoma; Machine learning; Retinal image processing
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32293466 PMCID: PMC7160894 DOI: 10.1186/s12938-020-00767-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Eng Online ISSN: 1475-925X Impact factor: 2.819
Fig. 1Optic nerve with normal cup and increased cup caused by glaucoma: a, b optic nerve with normal cup and dimension quotes; c, d optic nerve with increased cup
Projection of the number of people (aged between 40 and 80 years, in millions) with primary glaucoma in 2020 and 2040
| World regiona | 2020a | 2040a |
|---|---|---|
| Asia | 46.24 (33.08−65.91) | 66.83 (48.39–93.77) |
| Africa | 10.31 (6.41−15.28) | 19.14 (11.89–28.30) |
| Europe | 7.12 (5.20−9.68) | 7.85 (5.76–10.55) |
| North America | 3.94 (2.61−5.72) | 4.72 (3.13–6.75) |
| Latin America and the Caribbean | 8.11 (4.46−14.62) | 12.86 (7.12–22.85) |
| Oceania | 0.30 (0.16−0.50) | 0.42 (0.22–0.69) |
| Worldwide | 76.02 (51.92–111.7) | 111.82 (76.50–162.9) |
aData from the systematic review by Tham et al. [22]
Main studies using features extraction
| Methods | Year | Data | Preprocessing | Features Extract | No. of features | Best classifiera | Resultsa (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acc | Sp | Sn | |||||||
| Noronha et al. [ | 2014 | 272 | Image resize with interpolation method | Higher order cumulant features | 35 | NB | 92.65 | 100.00 | 92.00 |
| Acharya et al. [ | 2015 | 510 | Image resizing with histogram equalization | Gabor transform | 32 | SVM | 90.98 | 91.63 | 91.32 |
| Issac et al. [ | 2015 | 67 | Image resizing with statistical features | Cropped input image after segmentation | 3 | SVM | 94.11 | 90 | 100 |
| Raja et al. [ | 2015 | 158 | Grayscale conversion and histogram equalization | Hyper-analytic wavelet transformation | 16 | SVM | 90.14 | 85.66 | 94.30 |
| Singh et al. [ | 2016 | 63 | N/A | Wavelet feature extraction | 18 | k-NN | 94.75 | 100 | 90.91 |
| Maheshwari et al. [ | 2017 | 488 | Grayscale conversion | Variational mode decomposition | 4 | LS-SVM | 94.79 | 95.88 | 93.62 |
| Soltani et al. [ | 2018 | 104 | Histogram equalization and noise filtering | Randomized Hough transform | 4 | Fuzzy logic | 90.15 | 94.80 | 97.80 |
| Koh et al. [ | 2018 | 2220 | NA | Pyramid histogram of visual words and Fisher vector | 4 x 4 (grid) | RF | 96.05 | 95.32 | 96.29 |
| Mohamed et al. [ | 2019 | 166 | Color channel selection and illumination correction | Superpixel feature extraction module | 256 | SVM | 98.63 | 97.60 | 92.30 |
| Rehman et al. [ | 2019 | 110 | Bilateral filtering | Intensity-based statistical features and texton-map histogram | 2 | SVM | 99.30 | 99.40 | 96.90 |
aOnly the best results obtained in each method were left
k-NN classifier, least-squares support vector machine LS-SVM, random forest RF, naive Bayes NB, support vector machine SVM
Main studies using deep convolutional network
| Methods | Year | Architecture | Metrics (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acc | Sp | Sn | |||
| Li et al. [ | 2018 | Inception-v3 | 92 | 95.6 | 92.34 |
| Fu et al. [ | 2018 | Disc-aware ensemble network (DENet) | 91.83 | 83.80 | 83.80 |
| Raghavendra et al. [ | 2018 | Eighteen-layer CNN | 98.13 | 98.3 | 98 |
| dos Santos Ferreira et al. [ | 2018 | U-net for segmentation and fully connected with dropout for classification | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Christopher et al. [ | 2018 | ResNet50 | 97 | 93 | 92 |
| Chai et al. [ | 2018 | MB-NN | 91.51 | 92.33 | 90.90 |
| Bajwa et al. [ | 2019 | Four convolutional layers and fully connected layers | 87.40 | 85 | 71.17 |
| Liu et al. [ | 2019 | ResNet | 99.6 | 97.7 | 96.2 |
aOnly the best results obtained in each method were entered
Fig. 2Generic architecture using features extraction
Fig. 3Generic architecture using deep convolutional network
Fig. 4Metrics generic architecture using features extraction
Fig. 5Metrics generic architecture using deep convolutional network