RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Deep Learning based Intraretinal Layer Segmentation using Cascaded Compressed U-Net
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.11.19.21266592
DO 10.1101/2021.11.19.21266592
A1 Yadav, Sunil K.
A1 Kafieh, Rahele
A1 Zimmermann, Hanna G.
A1 Kauer-Bonin, Josef
A1 Nouri-Mahdavi, Kouros
A1 Mohammadzadeh, Vahid
A1 Shi, Lynn
A1 Kadas, Ella M.
A1 Paul, Friedemann
A1 Motamedi, Seyedamirhosein
A1 Brandt, Alexander U.
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/11/21/2021.11.19.21266592.abstract
AB Intraretinal layer segmentation on macular optical coherence tomography (OCT) images generates non invasive biomarkers querying neuronal structures with near cellular resolution. While first deep learning methods have delivered promising results with high computing power demands, a reliable, power efficient and reproducible intraretinal layer segmentation is still an unmet need. We propose a cascaded two-stage network for intraretinal layer segmentation, with both networks being compressed versions of U-Net (CCU-INSEG). The first network is responsible for retinal tissue segmentation from OCT B-scans. The second network segments 8 intraretinal layers with high fidelity. By compressing U-Net, we achieve 392- and 26-time reductions in model size and parameters in the first and second network, respectively. Still, our method delivers almost similar accuracy compared to U-Net without additional constraints of computation and memory resources. At the post-processing stage, we introduce Laplacian-based outlier detection with layer surface hole filling by adaptive non-linear interpolation. We trained our method using 17,458 B-scans from patients with autoimmune optic neuropathies, i.e. multiple sclerosis, and healthy controls. Voxel-wise comparison against manual segmentation produces a mean absolute error of 2.3μm, which is 2.5x better than the device’s own segmentation. Voxel-wise comparison against external multicenter data leads to a mean absolute error of 2.6μm for glaucoma data using the same gold standard segmentation approach, and 3.7μm mean absolute error compared against an externally segmented reference data set. In 20 macular volume scans from patients with severe disease, 3.5% of B-scan segmentation results were rejected by an experienced grader, whereas this was the case in 41.4% of B-scans segmented with a graph-based reference method.Competing Interest StatementSKY and EMK are founders and hold shares of Nocturne GmbH, a company interested in commercializing parts of the method described in this study. JKB is an employee of Nocturne GmbH. AUB and FP hold shares in Nocturne. KNM has received an unrestricted grant from Heidelberg Engineering. All other authors report no potential conflicts of interest.Funding StatementThis study was funded in part by technology transfer grants from the German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Engery (BMBF Exist I 03EFEBE079 to Charite - Universitaetsmedizin Berlin and BMBF Exist II BD_03EUEBE079 to Nocturne GmbH) and by the NeuroCure Clinical Research Center (NCRC), funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) under Germany's Excellence Strategy - EXC-2049 - 390688087. The UCLA validation cohort was supported by an NIH R01 grant (EY027929, KNM), an unrestricted Departmental Grant to UCLA Department of Ophthalmology from Research to Prevent Blindness (KNM), and an unrestricted grant from Heidelberg Engineering (KNM).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study was approved by the local ethics committee at Charite - Universitaetsmedizin Berlin (EA1/131/09, EA1/163/12, EA1/182/10) and was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki in its current applicable form and the applicable European ad German laws. All participants gave written informed consent. Data from UCLA was provided under UCLA IRB #11-003602, and all participants gave written informed consent. Data from JHU is freely available and was downloaded on February 24th 2021 from http://iacl.jhu.edu/index.php?title=Resources.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors. Due to EU GDPR data privacy regulations, OCT source data cannot be shared or made publicly available.