Convexity shape constraints for retinal blood vessel segmentation and foveal avascular zone detection

Retinal Vessel Segmentation, a Review of Classic and Deep Methods

Retinal illnesses such as diabetic retinopathy (DR) are the main causes of vision loss. In the early recognition of eye diseases, the segmentation of blood vessels in retina images plays an important role. Different symptoms of ocular diseases can be identified by the geometric features of ocular arteries. However, due to the complex construction of the blood vessels and their different thicknesses, segmenting the retina image is a challenging task. There are a number of algorithms that helped the detection of retinal diseases. This paper presents an overview of papers from 2016 to 2022 that discuss machine learning and deep learning methods for automatic vessel segmentation. The methods are divided into two groups: Deep learning-based, and classic methods. Algorithms, classifiers, pre-processing and specific techniques of each group is described, comprehensively. The performances of recent works are compared based on their achieved accuracy in different datasets in inclusive tables. A survey of most popular datasets like DRIVE, STARE, HRF and CHASE_DB1 is also given in this paper. Finally, a list of findings from this review is presented in the conclusion section.

A new baseline for retinal vessel segmentation: Numerical identification and correction of methodological inconsistencies affecting 100+ papers

In the last 15 years, the segmentation of vessels in retinal images has become an intensively researched problem in medical imaging, with hundreds of algorithms published. One of the de facto benchmarking data sets of vessel segmentation techniques is the DRIVE data set. Since DRIVE contains a predefined split of training and test images, the published performance results of the various segmentation techniques should provide a reliable ranking of the algorithms. Including more than 100 papers in the study, we performed a detailed numerical analysis of the coherence of the published performance scores. We found inconsistencies in the reported scores related to the use of the field of view (FoV), which has a significant impact on the performance scores. We attempted to eliminate the biases using numerical techniques to provide a more realistic picture of the state of the art. Based on the results, we have formulated several findings, most notably: despite the well-defined test set of DRIVE, most rankings in published papers are based on non-comparable figures; in contrast to the near-perfect accuracy scores reported in the literature, the highest accuracy score achieved to date is 0.9582 in the FoV region, which is 1% higher than that of human annotators. The methods we have developed for identifying and eliminating the evaluation biases can be easily applied to other domains where similar problems may arise.