Lakshmana Kumar Ramasamy1, Shynu Gopalan Padinjappurathu2, Seifedine Kadry3, Robertas Damaševičius4. 1. Hindusthan College of Engineering and Technology, Coimbatore, India. 2. Vellore Institute of Technology University, Vellore, India. 3. Noroff University College, Kristiansand, Norway. 4. Department of Applied Informatics, Vytautas Magnus University, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Abstract
Diabetes is one of the most prevalent diseases in the world, which is a metabolic disorder characterized by high blood sugar. Diabetes complications are leading to Diabetic Retinopathy (DR). The early stages of DR may have either no sign or cause minor vision problems, but later stages of the disease can lead to blindness. DR diagnosis is an exceedingly difficult task because of changes in the retina during the disease stages. An automatic DR early detection method can save a patient's vision and can also support the ophthalmologists in DR screening. This paper develops a model for the diagnostics of DR. Initially, we extract and fuse the ophthalmoscopic features from the retina images based on textural gray-level features like co-occurrence, run-length matrix, as well as the coefficients of the Ridgelet Transform. Based on the retina features, the Sequential Minimal Optimization (SMO) classification is used to classify diabetic retinopathy. For performance analysis, the openly accessible retinal image datasets are used, and the findings of the experiments demonstrate the quality and efficacy of the proposed method (we achieved 98.87% sensitivity, 95.24% specificity, 97.05% accuracy on DIARETDB1 dataset, and 90.9% sensitivity, 91.0% specificity, 91.0% accuracy on KAGGLE dataset).
Diabetes is one of the most prevalent diseases in the world, which is a metabolic disorder characterized by high blood sugar. Diabetes complications are leading to Diabetic Retinopathy (DR). The early stages of DR may have either no sign or cause minor vision problems, but later stages of the disease can lead to blindness. DR diagnosis is an exceedingly difficult task because of changes in the retina during the disease stages. An automatic DR early detection method can save a patient's vision and can also support the ophthalmologists in DR screening. This paper develops a model for the diagnostics of DR. Initially, we extract and fuse the ophthalmoscopic features from the retina images based on textural gray-level features like co-occurrence, run-length matrix, as well as the coefficients of the Ridgelet Transform. Based on the retina features, the Sequential Minimal Optimization (SMO) classification is used to classify diabetic retinopathy. For performance analysis, the openly accessible retinal image datasets are used, and the findings of the experiments demonstrate the quality and efficacy of the proposed method (we achieved 98.87% sensitivity, 95.24% specificity, 97.05% accuracy on DIARETDB1 dataset, and 90.9% sensitivity, 91.0% specificity, 91.0% accuracy on KAGGLE dataset).
The World Health Organization (WHO) assesses that 347 million people currently suffer from diabetes and that in 2030 this disease will be the seventh leading reason for death in the world (Murugan, 2019). Over the years, diabetespatients will usually exhibit deviations from the retina norm, causing an issue called diabetic retinopathy (DR). It is a serious cause of visual loss, including blindness. It involves type 1 and type 2 diabetes complications. DR is caused by impaired blood vessels in the retina. Ophthalmologists diagnosis DR by studying exacting and time-intensive images of the retinal fundus. Automating DR diagnosis will reduce the pressure on ophthalmologists to concentrate on vulnerable patients and allow further medical screening (Umapathy et al., 2019). Retinal lesions such as hemorrhages (HRs), micro-aneurysms (MAs), and hard exudates (HE) can be used to identify DR affected retinal images. Figure 1 shows the retinal features.
This section explicitly details the processing of the diabetic retinopathy through the fusion of features from gray level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM) and gray level run length matrix (GLRLM) and Continuous Ridgelet Transform (CRT). Specific problems regarding feature extraction approaches are examined, and the proposed scheme is refined.
Materials
The data image collection used for this analysis consists of photographs previously identified as normal (without DR) images and abnormal (DR) images with different stages like mild, moderate, and severe. Two openly accessible datasets such as DIARETDB1 (DIARETDB1, 2007) and KAGGLE (Kaggle Dataset, 2019) are collected. The DIARETDB1 contains 89 fundus color images (size of 1500 1152). According to the experts who partake in the assessment, 84 images are assigned as DR, and the remaining 5 images are normal. The fundus images were taken using the identical optical fundus camera with different exposure settings for a similar 50-degree field of view. This collection of data is referred to as "fundus images calibration stage 1."The other retina data is extracted from Kaggle, which are retina scan images at APTOS 2019 Blindness Detection dataset. These images have a size of 224 224 pixels so that they can be conveniently used with several pre-trained neural network models. This dataset contains 5 categories of colored fundus images: No DR, Mild, Moderate, Severe, and PDR.
Methods
This section explains the overall general workflow (shown in Fig. 3), and also explains the features used for detecting DR. Premature clinical symptoms of diabetic retinopathy consist of microaneurysms, hemorrhages of dots, spots of cotton wool, blots, and intraretinal microvascular anomalies (IRMAs). Table 1 shows the clinical features of DR.
Figure 3
Overview of the proposed methodology workflow.
Table 1
Ophthalmoscopic features for retina disease symptoms.
Retina disease symptoms
Ophthalmoscopic features
No retinopathyMildModerateSevereProliferative diabetic retinopathy
Microaneurysms and dot hemorrhages occur on the fundus as small lesions that characterize the ballooning of capillaries in which the vessel wall is weakened by the lack of pericyte protection and/or glial attachment. Hemorrhages and fluid release from microaneurysms contribute to intermittent edema which may leave heavy deposits of lipoproteins (“exudates”) in the retinal neuropile before reabsorbed (Lechner, O’Leary & Stitt, 2017).
Grey level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM)
The GLCM defines the texture relationship between pixels by executing an action in the images based on the second-order statistics. For this operation, normally two pixels are used. The GLCM calculates the frequency defined by the variations of these pixel intensity values, which reflects the pixel-pair occurrence creation (Sastry et al., 2012). The GLCM features are described as a matrix having the same number of rows and columns as the grey features in the image. Based on their location, all pixel pairs can differ. Such matrix components include the mathematical probability values of second-order, based on the rows and columns gray color. The transient matrix is very big if the intensity values are large (Mohanaiah, Sathyanarayana & GuruKumar, 2013). The GLCM size depends on the values of gray level retained by an image.Assign be an image with gray levels, an -by- dimensional matrix would be the GLCM for the image. At position , this GLCM tracks the number of times two levels of intensity and co-occur at orientation in the image at distance . The GLCM of an image with rows, columns and offset , can be characterized asGLCM is expected to keep the probability of co-occurrence of any two intensities, rather than the count. And the GLCM values are translated to show probabilities. To that effect, to determine estimates, the number of times a given mixture of intensities occurs is determined by the overall number of potential results. A GLCM is converted into approximate probabilities as follows:here and is the row and column, represents the count of co-occurrences of intensity values and , and is the total number of intensity values (Do-Hong, Le-Tien & Bui-Thu, 2010).The GLCM features used in this work are: autocorrelation, correlation, cluster shade, cluster prominence, contrast, difference entropy, dissimilarity, difference variance, energy, entropy, homogeneity, information measure of correlation, maximum probability, inverse difference, sum of average, sum of entropy, sum of squares variance, and sum of variance.
Gray level run length matrix (GLRLM)
GLRLM is a model representing texture that finds out the spatial plane characteristics of each pixel using high-order statistics. In GLRLM, statistics involved are the number of gray level value pairs and their length of runs in a region of interest (ROI). A gray level run is a group of pixels with the same value of the gray level, spread in the ROI in consecutive and collinear directions. The number of pixels is the length of gray level run in that particular set. Therefore, such a set is defined by a gray level value and the length of a gray level running mutually. GLRLM is a type of two-dimensional histogram in the structure of a matrix that records all the different combinations of gray level values and gray level.The gray level values and runs are conventionally indicated as row and column keys, respectively, of the matrix, thus the -th matrix value determines the count of combinations whose gray level value is i and whose run length is j. Four major directions are typically known, i.e., horizontal (0°), vertical (90°), diagonal (135°), and anti-diagonal (45°).Suppose is the -th GLRLM point. Additionally, is used to indicate the set of dissimilar run lengths that currently exist in the ROI, and is used to indicate the set of different gray shades. Then at last be the cumulative number of pixels in the ROI.Table 2 shows the formulas for the GLRLM features, where:
Table 2
Summary of gray-level run length matrix (GLRLM) features.
GLRLM features
Formula
Short Run Emphasis (SRE)
∑i∈Ng∑j∈NrPijj2/Nve
Long Run Emphasis (LRE)
∑i∈Ng∑j∈Nrj2Pij/Nve
Gray Level Non-uniformity (GLN)
∑i∈Ng(∑j∈NrPij)2/Nve
Run Length Non-uniformity (RLN)
∑j∈Nr(∑i∈NgPij)2/Nve
Run Percentage (RP)
∑i∈Ng∑j∈NrPij/N
Low Gray Level Run Emphasis (LGRE)
∑i∈Ng∑j∈NrPiji2/Nve
High Gray Level Run Emphasis (HGRE)
∑i∈Ng∑j∈Nri2Pij/Nve
Short Run Low Gray Level Emphasis (SRLGE)
∑i∈Ng∑j∈NrPiji2j2/Nve
Short Run High Gray Level Emphasis (SRHGE)
∑i∈Ng∑j∈Nri2Pijj2/Nve
Long Run Low Gray Level Emphasis (LRLGE)
∑i∈Ng∑j∈Nrj2Piji2/Nve
Short Run High Gray Level Emphasis (LRHGE)
∑i∈Ng∑j∈Nri2j2Pij/Nve
Continuous ridgelet transform (CRT)
The idea of the latter is to display linear features image to point using Radon transform and the subsequent use of wavelet transformations. The result of this operation is an effective representation of two-dimensional functions with piecewise smooth areas separated by linear plots. The main difference between ridge functions and wavelet functions are that ridgelets are two-dimensional inseparable functions and determine not only the parameters of scale and shift but also their orientation in space (Candès, 1999). The CRT of function is defined aswhere are the ridgelets defined byhere, is the smoothly decaying function.In images, CRT can be calculated via Radon transform (RT). RT of a two-dimensional object is the set of line integrals indexed by given bywhere is the Dirac distribution. Then CRT applies a 1-D wavelet transform to the projections of the RT as follows:The Ridglet transform scheme is shown in Fig. 4. The main stages of its implementation are as follows:
Figure 4
A schematic representation of Continuous Ridgelet transform.
Calculation of direct two-dimensional transformation Fourier (FFT2D).The application of forward Fourier transform from the rectangular grid of coordinates to the polar grid using the interpolation operation coefficients of the Fourier transform.The use of the inverse one-dimensional transform Fourier (IFFT1D) to each line of the obtained polar Noah grid. The result of this operation is the Radon transform coefficients.Application to the plane of the Radon transform of the one-dimensional wavelet transform (WT1D) along with a variable that determines the angle of the line produces the ridgelet coefficients.
Diabetic retinopathy detection
This section explains the proposed methodology for diabetic retinopathy detection. Figure 5 shows the proposed diabetic retinopathy detection.
Preprocessed result of normal retina image: (A) input image, (B) green channel, (C) histogram enhanced, (D) filtered image, (E) after bottom hat transform, (F) after top hat transform, (G) blood vessels segmented, (H) contours enhanced.
Preprocessed result of diabetic retinopathy image: (A) input image, (B) green channel, (C) histogram enhanced, (D) filtered image, (E) after bottom hat transform, (F) after top hat transform, (G) blood vessels segmented, (H) contours enhanced.
Preprocessed result of normal retina image: (A) input image, (B) green channel, (C) histogram enhanced, (D) filtered image, (E) after bottom hat transform, (F) after top hat transform, (G) blood vessels segmented, (H) contours enhanced.
Preprocessed result of diabetic retinopathy image: (A) input image, (B) green channel, (C) histogram enhanced, (D) filtered image, (E) after bottom hat transform, (F) after top hat transform, (G) blood vessels segmented, (H) contours enhanced.
Texture in feature extraction is the key characteristic of an image. Numerous methods for texture analysis are introduced in various fields of study. We use a fusion of textural GLCM and GLRLM features and Ridgelet Transform features.
Image classification
This is the last stage of the recognition process in diabetic retinopathy disease. After extraction of features, the retina fundus image is classified as normal, or DR. SMO (Sequential Minimal Optimization) is a straightforward algorithm that uses only two Lagrange multipliers at each iteration to move the chunking process to the nearest possible expression. It determines the optimal value for these multipliers and updates the SVM until it fixes the whole QP problem. The benefit of SMO is that the optimization sub-problem can be solved analytically with two Lagrange multipliers.Detection of the diagnostic induced disease has its limits. When a device is prepared for a classification task, the issues are different. It would be able to work automatically by providing the system with proper classification instructions, which will have better classification performance. This study uses the SMO algorithm for classifying the DR.
Experimental Results
Performance measures
The performance analysis of the proposed system is explained in this section. The DR detection is implemented using MATLAB 2019b (MathWorks Inc., MA, USA). This work is evaluated based on Sensitivity, Specificity, Accuracy and F-score computed as follows:Here TP is a count of true positive class (normal retina), TN is the count of true negative class (DR). FP is the count of false-positive (normal retina predicted as DR). FN is the count of false-negative class (DR is predicted as the normal retina).
Results and Comparison
The feature extraction time of the two data set is shown in Tab. 3, while the DR recognition results are shown in Tab. 4. The feature extraction time from the DIARETDB1 and KAGGLE databased is about 2–2.5 min., which make the proposed method usable for real-time clinical applications. The proposed method has achieved an accuracy of 97.05%, sensitivity of 98.87%, and specificity 95.24% on the DIARETDB1 dataset. On the KAGGLE dataset, the proposed method achieved an accuracy of 91.0%, sensitivity of 90.9%, and specificity of 91.0%. The results for both datasets are summarized as classification confusion matrices in Fig. 9.
Table 3
Feature extraction time for DIARETDB1 and KAGGLE datasets.
Dataset
Feature extraction time (s)
DIARETDB1
131.56
KAGGLE
159.19
Table 4
Performance evaluation metrics for DIARETDB1 and KAGGLE datasets.
We compare our results with the results of other authors, which used a wide variety of techniques from handicraft feature extraction and heuristic optimization methods to deep learning networks, achieved on the same datasets. The comparison is presented in Tabs. 5 and 6. Other authors have employed a wide variety of machine learning, deep learning and heuristic optimization techniques.
Table 5
Comparison of performance evaluation results for DIARETDB1 dataset.
Reference
Method
SE(%)
SP(%)
ACC (%)
(Das, Dandapat & Bora, 2019)
Contrast sensitivity index (CSI), Shannon entropy, multi-resolution (MR) inter-band eigen features and intra-band energy
–
–
85.22
(Long et al., 2019)
Fuzzy C-means clustering (FCM) & support vector machine (SVM)
97.5
97.8
97.7
(Mateen et al., 2020)
Feature fusion from Inception-v3, ResNet-50, and VGGNet-19 models
–
–
98.91
(Pruthi, Khanna & Arora, 2020)
Glowworm Swarm optimization
–
–
96.56
(Sharif et al., 2020)
Histogram orientation gradient (HOG) and local binary pattern (LBP) feature fusion & decision tree (DT)
98.1
91.8
96.6
(Zago et al., 2020)
Custom convolutional neural network (CNN)
90
87
–
(Chetoui & Akhloufi, 2020)
Extended Inception-Resnet-v2 network fine-tuned by cosine annealing strategy
98.8
90.1
97.1
(Alaguselvi & Murugan, 2020)
Morphological operation, matched filter, principal component analysis (PCA), edge detection by ISODATA, and convex hull transform
99.03
98.37
98.68
Proposed
A fusion of texture and ridgelet features & SMO
98.87
95.24
97.05
Table 6
Comparison of performance evaluation results for KAGGLE dataset.
Reference
Method
SE(%)
SP(%)
ACC (%)
(Bodapati et al., 2020)
ConvNet features & deep neural network (DNN)
–
–
80.96
(Li et al., 2019)
DCNN features + SVM
–
–
86.1
(Mateen et al., 2019)
VGG-19 features, singular value decomposition (SVD)
–
–
98.34
(Nazir et al., 2019)
Tetragonal local octal patterns & extreme learning machine (ELM)
–
–
99.6
(Qummar et al., 2019)
Ensemble of Resnet50, Inceptionv3, Xception, Dense121, Dense169 models
–
95
80.8
(Sudha & Ganeshbabu, 2021)
VGG-19 model, structure tensor and active contour approximation
98.83
96.76
98.28
(Vaishnavi, Ravi & Anbarasi, 2020)
Contrast-limited adaptive histogram equalization (CLAHE) model and AlexNet architecture with SoftMax layer
92.00
97.86
95.86
(Math & Fatima, 2020)
Custom CNN model with fine-tuning
96.37
96.37
–
Proposed
A fusion of texture and ridgelet features & SMO
90.9
91.0
91.0
On the DIARETDB1 dataset, (Das, Dandapat & Bora, 2019) used contrast sensitivity index (CSI), Shannon entropy, multi-resolution (MR) inter-band eigen features and intra-band energy. (Long et al., 2019) used Fuzzy C-means clustering (FCM) and SVM classifier. (Mateen et al., 2020) employed feature fusion from Inception-v3, ResNet-50, and VGGNet-19 deep convolutional models. (Pruthi, Khanna & Arora, 2020) used a nature-inspired Glowworm Swarm Optimization algorithm. (Sharif et al., 2020) adopted Histogram orientation gradient (HOG) and local binary pattern (LBP) feature fusion combined with Decision Tree (DT) classifier. (Zago et al., 2020) used a custom fully patch-based CNN. Chetoui and (Chetoui & Akhloufi, 2020) used an extended Inception-Resnet-v2 network fine-tuned by cosine annealing strategy. Alaguselvi and (Alaguselvi & Murugan, 2020) used morphological operation, matched filter, Principal Component Analysis (PCA), edge finding by ISODATA, and convex hull transform. On the KAGGLE dataset, (Bodapati et al., 2020) used ConvNet features and Deep Neural Network (DNN) for classification. (Li et al., 2019) employed DCNN as feature extractors and SVM for classification. (Mateen et al., 2019) used pretrained CNN model (Inception-v3, Residual Network-50, and Visual Geometry Group Network-19) feature fusion followed by the softmax classifier. (Nazir et al., 2019) used tetragonal local octal patterns and Extreme Learning Machine (ELM). (Qummar et al., 2019) used an ensemble of Resnet50, Inceptionv3, Xception, Dense121, and Dense169 deep network models. (Sudha & Ganeshbabu, 2021) adopted the VGG-19 model combined with structure tensor for enhancing local patterns of edge elements and active contours approximation for lesion segmentation. (Vaishnavi, Ravi & Anbarasi, 2020) used Contrast-limited adaptive histogram equalization (CLAHE) model and AlexNet network architecture with SoftMax layer for classification. (Math & Fatima, 2020) used a custom CNN architecture with fine-tuning.Our results demonstrate the competitiveness of our method with the state-of-the-art. On the DIARETDB1 dataset, our method achieved very good sensitivity, while considering the accuracy, only the methods of (Long et al., 2019), and (Alaguselvi & Murugan, 2020) have achieved marginally higher accuracy. However, for disease diagnostics, sensitivity is more important than accuracy (Loong, 2003). For the KAGGLE dataset, our method has performed slightly worse, but still achieved an accuracy over 90%, which is in line with other state-of-the-art DR recognition methods.
Discussion
The proposed method for the detection of diabetic retinopathy using the Ridgelet Transform and the Sequential Minimal Optimization (SMO) presents an alternative to recent works based on convolutional networks and deep learning. The achieved results are competitive with the state-of-the-art results while the common pitfalls of deep learning methods such as the need for very large datasets for training deep network models as well as the underfitting and overfitting problems are avoided. Moreover, the results provided by artificial intelligence methods are not explainable. As a result, any black box diagnostics systems are not accepted by a professional ophthalmologist in the real world, regardless of their fine results.The method presented in this article adopts a traditional approach. However, our approach is different from other works based on feature creation and classification. The proposed method also has some limitations as using all textural and Ridgelet features may include irrelevant features for the task of DR recognition, which can incur larger computation time, and sometimes even reduce the recognition accuracy. These limitations could be overcome by further fine-tuning the parameters of SMO technique.
Conclusion
The integration of the extracted features using texture analysis methods (GLCM and GLRLM) and Ridgelet Transform features suggests an automated approach for classifying Diabetic Retinopathy (DR). The extracted features using the suggested approach are used for the process of classification using the SMO classifier to identify DR. The results show that the proposed method is competitive with other state-of-the-art methods on the DIARETDB1 and KAGGLE datasets (we achieved 98.87% sensitivity, 95.24% specificity, 97.05% accuracy on DIARETDB1 dataset, and 90.9% sensitivity, 91.0% specificity, 91.0% accuracy on KAGGLE dataset). The obtained results show that image processing techniques combined with optimization methods can still be competitive to convolutional network and deep learning based approaches.
Code describing the implementation of the proposed method.
Code of implemented method (in MATLAB).Click here for additional data file.Click here for additional data file.Click here for additional data file.