Mathematics (May 2023)

Quality Assessment Assistance of Lateral Knee X-rays: A Hybrid Convolutional Neural Network Approach

  • Simon Lysdahlgaard,
  • Sandi Baressi Šegota,
  • Søren Hess,
  • Ronald Antulov,
  • Martin Weber Kusk,
  • Zlatan Car

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/math11102392
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 11, no. 10
p. 2392

Abstract

Read online

A common issue with X-ray examinations (XE) is the erroneous quality classification of the XE, implying that the process needs to be repeated, thus delaying the diagnostic assessment of the XE and increasing the amount of radiation the patient receives. The authors propose a system for automatic quality classification of XE based on convolutional neural networks (CNN) that would simplify this process and significantly decrease erroneous quality classification. The data used for CNN training consist of 4000 knee images obtained via radiography procedure (KXE) in total, with 2000 KXE labeled as acceptable and 2000 as unacceptable. Additionally, half of the KXE belonging to each label are right knees and left knees. Due to the sensitivity to image orientation of some CNNs, three approaches are discussed: (1) Left-right-knee (LRK) classifies XE based just on their label, without taking into consideration their orientation; (2) Orientation discriminator (OD) for the left knee (LK) and right knee (RK) analyses images based on their orientation and inserts them into two separate models regarding orientation; (3) Orientation discriminator combined with knee XRs flipped to the left or right (OD-LFK)/OD-RFK trains the models with all images being horizontally flipped to the same orientation and uses the aforementioned OD to determine whether the image needs to be flipped or not. All the approaches are tested with five CNNs (AlexNet, ResNet50, ResNet101, ResNet152, and Xception), with grid search and k-fold cross-validation. The best results are achieved using the OD-RFK hybrid approach with the Xception network architecture as the classifier and ResNet152 as the OD, with an average AUC of 0.97 (±0.01).

Keywords