Cargando…
An objective comparison of detection and segmentation algorithms for artefacts in clinical endoscopy
We present a comprehensive analysis of the submissions to the first edition of the Endoscopy Artefact Detection challenge (EAD). Using crowd-sourcing, this initiative is a step towards understanding the limitations of existing state-of-the-art computer vision methods applied to endoscopy and promoti...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7026422/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32066744 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-59413-5 |
_version_ | 1783498682581123072 |
---|---|
author | Ali, Sharib Zhou, Felix Braden, Barbara Bailey, Adam Yang, Suhui Cheng, Guanju Zhang, Pengyi Li, Xiaoqiong Kayser, Maxime Soberanis-Mukul, Roger D. Albarqouni, Shadi Wang, Xiaokang Wang, Chunqing Watanabe, Seiryo Oksuz, Ilkay Ning, Qingtian Yang, Shufan Khan, Mohammad Azam Gao, Xiaohong W. Realdon, Stefano Loshchenov, Maxim Schnabel, Julia A. East, James E. Wagnieres, Georges Loschenov, Victor B. Grisan, Enrico Daul, Christian Blondel, Walter Rittscher, Jens |
author_facet | Ali, Sharib Zhou, Felix Braden, Barbara Bailey, Adam Yang, Suhui Cheng, Guanju Zhang, Pengyi Li, Xiaoqiong Kayser, Maxime Soberanis-Mukul, Roger D. Albarqouni, Shadi Wang, Xiaokang Wang, Chunqing Watanabe, Seiryo Oksuz, Ilkay Ning, Qingtian Yang, Shufan Khan, Mohammad Azam Gao, Xiaohong W. Realdon, Stefano Loshchenov, Maxim Schnabel, Julia A. East, James E. Wagnieres, Georges Loschenov, Victor B. Grisan, Enrico Daul, Christian Blondel, Walter Rittscher, Jens |
author_sort | Ali, Sharib |
collection | PubMed |
description | We present a comprehensive analysis of the submissions to the first edition of the Endoscopy Artefact Detection challenge (EAD). Using crowd-sourcing, this initiative is a step towards understanding the limitations of existing state-of-the-art computer vision methods applied to endoscopy and promoting the development of new approaches suitable for clinical translation. Endoscopy is a routine imaging technique for the detection, diagnosis and treatment of diseases in hollow-organs; the esophagus, stomach, colon, uterus and the bladder. However the nature of these organs prevent imaged tissues to be free of imaging artefacts such as bubbles, pixel saturation, organ specularity and debris, all of which pose substantial challenges for any quantitative analysis. Consequently, the potential for improved clinical outcomes through quantitative assessment of abnormal mucosal surface observed in endoscopy videos is presently not realized accurately. The EAD challenge promotes awareness of and addresses this key bottleneck problem by investigating methods that can accurately classify, localize and segment artefacts in endoscopy frames as critical prerequisite tasks. Using a diverse curated multi-institutional, multi-modality, multi-organ dataset of video frames, the accuracy and performance of 23 algorithms were objectively ranked for artefact detection and segmentation. The ability of methods to generalize to unseen datasets was also evaluated. The best performing methods (top 15%) propose deep learning strategies to reconcile variabilities in artefact appearance with respect to size, modality, occurrence and organ type. However, no single method outperformed across all tasks. Detailed analyses reveal the shortcomings of current training strategies and highlight the need for developing new optimal metrics to accurately quantify the clinical applicability of methods. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7026422 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70264222020-02-26 An objective comparison of detection and segmentation algorithms for artefacts in clinical endoscopy Ali, Sharib Zhou, Felix Braden, Barbara Bailey, Adam Yang, Suhui Cheng, Guanju Zhang, Pengyi Li, Xiaoqiong Kayser, Maxime Soberanis-Mukul, Roger D. Albarqouni, Shadi Wang, Xiaokang Wang, Chunqing Watanabe, Seiryo Oksuz, Ilkay Ning, Qingtian Yang, Shufan Khan, Mohammad Azam Gao, Xiaohong W. Realdon, Stefano Loshchenov, Maxim Schnabel, Julia A. East, James E. Wagnieres, Georges Loschenov, Victor B. Grisan, Enrico Daul, Christian Blondel, Walter Rittscher, Jens Sci Rep Article We present a comprehensive analysis of the submissions to the first edition of the Endoscopy Artefact Detection challenge (EAD). Using crowd-sourcing, this initiative is a step towards understanding the limitations of existing state-of-the-art computer vision methods applied to endoscopy and promoting the development of new approaches suitable for clinical translation. Endoscopy is a routine imaging technique for the detection, diagnosis and treatment of diseases in hollow-organs; the esophagus, stomach, colon, uterus and the bladder. However the nature of these organs prevent imaged tissues to be free of imaging artefacts such as bubbles, pixel saturation, organ specularity and debris, all of which pose substantial challenges for any quantitative analysis. Consequently, the potential for improved clinical outcomes through quantitative assessment of abnormal mucosal surface observed in endoscopy videos is presently not realized accurately. The EAD challenge promotes awareness of and addresses this key bottleneck problem by investigating methods that can accurately classify, localize and segment artefacts in endoscopy frames as critical prerequisite tasks. Using a diverse curated multi-institutional, multi-modality, multi-organ dataset of video frames, the accuracy and performance of 23 algorithms were objectively ranked for artefact detection and segmentation. The ability of methods to generalize to unseen datasets was also evaluated. The best performing methods (top 15%) propose deep learning strategies to reconcile variabilities in artefact appearance with respect to size, modality, occurrence and organ type. However, no single method outperformed across all tasks. Detailed analyses reveal the shortcomings of current training strategies and highlight the need for developing new optimal metrics to accurately quantify the clinical applicability of methods. Nature Publishing Group UK 2020-02-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7026422/ /pubmed/32066744 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-59413-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Article Ali, Sharib Zhou, Felix Braden, Barbara Bailey, Adam Yang, Suhui Cheng, Guanju Zhang, Pengyi Li, Xiaoqiong Kayser, Maxime Soberanis-Mukul, Roger D. Albarqouni, Shadi Wang, Xiaokang Wang, Chunqing Watanabe, Seiryo Oksuz, Ilkay Ning, Qingtian Yang, Shufan Khan, Mohammad Azam Gao, Xiaohong W. Realdon, Stefano Loshchenov, Maxim Schnabel, Julia A. East, James E. Wagnieres, Georges Loschenov, Victor B. Grisan, Enrico Daul, Christian Blondel, Walter Rittscher, Jens An objective comparison of detection and segmentation algorithms for artefacts in clinical endoscopy |
title | An objective comparison of detection and segmentation algorithms for artefacts in clinical endoscopy |
title_full | An objective comparison of detection and segmentation algorithms for artefacts in clinical endoscopy |
title_fullStr | An objective comparison of detection and segmentation algorithms for artefacts in clinical endoscopy |
title_full_unstemmed | An objective comparison of detection and segmentation algorithms for artefacts in clinical endoscopy |
title_short | An objective comparison of detection and segmentation algorithms for artefacts in clinical endoscopy |
title_sort | objective comparison of detection and segmentation algorithms for artefacts in clinical endoscopy |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7026422/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32066744 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-59413-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT alisharib anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT zhoufelix anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT bradenbarbara anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT baileyadam anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT yangsuhui anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT chengguanju anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT zhangpengyi anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT lixiaoqiong anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT kaysermaxime anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT soberanismukulrogerd anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT albarqounishadi anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT wangxiaokang anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT wangchunqing anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT watanabeseiryo anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT oksuzilkay anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT ningqingtian anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT yangshufan anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT khanmohammadazam anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT gaoxiaohongw anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT realdonstefano anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT loshchenovmaxim anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT schnabeljuliaa anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT eastjamese anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT wagnieresgeorges anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT loschenovvictorb anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT grisanenrico anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT daulchristian anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT blondelwalter anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT rittscherjens anobjectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT alisharib objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT zhoufelix objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT bradenbarbara objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT baileyadam objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT yangsuhui objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT chengguanju objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT zhangpengyi objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT lixiaoqiong objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT kaysermaxime objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT soberanismukulrogerd objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT albarqounishadi objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT wangxiaokang objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT wangchunqing objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT watanabeseiryo objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT oksuzilkay objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT ningqingtian objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT yangshufan objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT khanmohammadazam objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT gaoxiaohongw objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT realdonstefano objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT loshchenovmaxim objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT schnabeljuliaa objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT eastjamese objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT wagnieresgeorges objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT loschenovvictorb objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT grisanenrico objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT daulchristian objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT blondelwalter objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy AT rittscherjens objectivecomparisonofdetectionandsegmentationalgorithmsforartefactsinclinicalendoscopy |