| Literature DB >> 36013305 |
Usman Yunus1, Javeria Amin2, Muhammad Sharif1, Mussarat Yasmin1, Seifedine Kadry3, Sujatha Krishnamoorthy4,5.
Abstract
Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is one of the deadliest forms of arthritis. If not treated at an early stage, it may lead to knee replacement. That is why early diagnosis of KOA is necessary for better treatment. Manually KOA detection is a time-consuming and error-prone task. Computerized methods play a vital role in accurate and speedy detection. Therefore, the classification and localization of the KOA method are proposed in this work using radiographic images. The two-dimensional radiograph images are converted into three-dimensional and LBP features are extracted having the dimension of N × 59 out of which the best features of N × 55 are selected using PCA. The deep features are also extracted using Alex-Net and Dark-net-53 with the dimensions of N × 1024 and N × 4096, respectively, where N represents the number of images. Then, N × 1000 features are selected individually from both models using PCA. Finally, the extracted features are fused serially with the dimension of N × 2055 and passed to the classifiers on a 10-fold cross-validation that provides an accuracy of 90.6% for the classification of KOA grades. The localization model is proposed with the combination of an open exchange neural network (ONNX) and YOLOv2 that is trained on the selected hyper-parameters. The proposed model provides 0.98 mAP for the localization of classified images. The experimental analysis proves that the presented framework provides better results as compared to existing works.Entities:
Keywords: KL grading; classification; features fusion; handcrafted features; knee osteoarthritis (KOA); localization
Year: 2022 PMID: 36013305 PMCID: PMC9410095 DOI: 10.3390/life12081126
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Life (Basel) ISSN: 2075-1729
Figure 1The architecture of the proposed methodology.
Figure 2Graphical representation of LBP features.
Figure 3Overview of feature extraction, selection, fusion, and classification.
Experiment for features selection method.
| Features Selection Methods | Accuracy |
|---|---|
| ICA | 0.87 |
| PCA | 0.90 |
Figure 4Multi-class confusion matrix.
Classification outcomes utilizing 10-fold cross-validation.
| Classifiers | G0 | G1 | G2 | G3 | G4 | Accuracy% | Precision% | Sensitivity% | F1 Score% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SVM | ✓ | 77.9 | 0.97 | 0.89 | 0.93 | ||||
| ✓ | 0.73 | 0.87 | 0.80 | ||||||
| ✓ | 0.75 | 0.90 | 0.82 | ||||||
| ✓ | 0.81 | 0.96 | 0.88 | ||||||
| ✓ | 0.82 | 0.93 | 0.87 | ||||||
| Fine KNN | ✓ | 90.6 | 0.97 | 0.89 | 0.93 | ||||
| ✓ | 0.73 | 0.85 | 0.79 | ||||||
| ✓ | 0.75 | 0.90 | 0.82 | ||||||
| ✓ | 0.81 | 0.96 | 0.88 | ||||||
| ✓ | 0.83 | 0.92 | 0.87 | ||||||
| Ensemble KNN | ✓ | 89.4 | 0.95 | 0.91 | 0.93 | ||||
| ✓ | 0.85 | 0.82 | 0.84 | ||||||
| ✓ | 0.82 | 0.89 | 0.86 | ||||||
| ✓ | 0.85 | 0.97 | 0.91 | ||||||
| ✓ | 0.81 | 0.99 | 0.89 |
Comparison of classifications results.
| Ref# | Year | Results (%) |
|---|---|---|
| [ | 2018 | 0.66ACC |
| [ | 2019 | 0.69ACC |
| [ | 2020 | 0.74ACC |
| [ | 2020 | Pre = 0.84, SE = 0.82 |
| [ | 2021 | ACC = 0.73 |
| [ | 2022 | ACC = 0. 84, F1-score 0.84 |
|
| ACC = 90.6, Pre = 0.85 | |
Figure 5KOA localization results (a,c) original KOA slices (b,d) predicted scores (where G denotes grades).
Configuration parameters of YOLOv2-ONNX model.
| Classes | 5 |
| Anchors | 13,17,18,21,43,49,73,108 |
| Mini-batch size | 64 |
| Max epochs | 100 |
| Verbose frequency | 30 |
| Learning rate | 0.001 |
Localization results comparison.
| Ref# | Year | Results |
|---|---|---|
| [ | 2022 | 0.95 IoU |
|
| 0.96 IoU, 0.98 mAP | |