A No-Reference Quality Metric for Retinal Vessel Tree Segmentation

Due to inevitable differences between the data used for training modern CAD systems and the data encountered when they are deployed in clinical scenarios, the ability to automatically assess the quality of predictions when no expert annotation is available can be critical. In this paper, we propose a new method for quality assessment of retinal vessel tree segmentations in the absence of a reference ground-truth. For this, we artificially degrade expert-annotated vessel map segmentations and then train a CNN to predict the similarity between the degraded images and their corresponding ground-truths. This similarity can be interpreted as a proxy to the quality of a segmentation. The proposed model can produce a visually meaningful quality score, effectively predicting the quality of a vessel tree segmentation in the absence of a manually segmented reference. We further demonstrate the usefulness of our approach by applying it to automatically find a threshold for soft probabilistic segmentations on a per-image basis. For an independent state-of-the-art unsupervised vessel segmentation technique, the thresholds selected by our approach lead to statistically significant improvements in F1-score \((+2.67\%)\) and Matthews Correlation Coefficient (+\(3.11\%\)) over the thresholds derived from ROC analysis on the training set. The score is also shown to correlate strongly with F1 and MCC when a reference is available.

[1]  Thomas Brox,et al.  U-Net: Convolutional Networks for Biomedical Image Segmentation , 2015, MICCAI.

[2]  Guy Cazuguel,et al.  FEEDBACK ON A PUBLICLY DISTRIBUTED IMAGE DATABASE: THE MESSIDOR DATABASE , 2014 .

[3]  Sven Loncaric,et al.  Diabetic retinopathy image database(DRiDB): A new database for diabetic retinopathy screening programs research , 2013, 2013 8th International Symposium on Image and Signal Processing and Analysis (ISPA).

[4]  C. Spearman The proof and measurement of association between two things. By C. Spearman, 1904. , 1987, The American journal of psychology.

[5]  David Atkinson,et al.  Image registration using uncertainty coefficients , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro.

[6]  Josien P. W. Pluim,et al.  Robust Retinal Vessel Segmentation via Locally Adaptive Derivative Frames in Orientation Scores , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[7]  José Manuel Bravo,et al.  A Function for Quality Evaluation of Retinal Vessel Segmentations , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[8]  A. Ghasemi,et al.  Normality Tests for Statistical Analysis: A Guide for Non-Statisticians , 2012, International journal of endocrinology and metabolism.

[9]  F. Wilcoxon Individual Comparisons by Ranking Methods , 1945 .

[10]  George Azzopardi,et al.  Trainable COSFIRE filters for vessel delineation with application to retinal images , 2015, Medical Image Anal..

[11]  Max A. Viergever,et al.  Mutual-information-based registration of medical images: a survey , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[12]  Konstantinos Kamnitsas,et al.  Reverse Classification Accuracy: Predicting Segmentation Performance in the Absence of Ground Truth , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[13]  Xin Yang,et al.  A Skeletal Similarity Metric for Quality Evaluation of Retinal Vessel Segmentation , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[14]  Max A. Viergever,et al.  Ridge-based vessel segmentation in color images of the retina , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.