Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-06T17:19:43.297Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Morphometric evaluation of two-pronucleus zygote images using image-processing techniques

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 August 2022

Niloofar Sayadi
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Engineering, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran
Sara Monji-Azad
Affiliation:
Mannheim Institute for Intelligent Systems in Medicine, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
Seyed Abolghasem Mirroshandel*
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Engineering, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran
Fatemeh Ghasemian
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran
*
Author for correspondence: S.A. Mirroshandel. Department of Computer Engineering, University of Guilan, Rasht, P.O. Box: 1841, Iran. Tel.: +98 13 33690274. Fax: +98 13 33690271. E-mail: mirroshandel@guilan.ac.ir
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Identifying embryos with a high potential for implementation remains a challenge in in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles. Despite progress in IVF treatment, only a minority of generated embryos has the ability to implant. Another drawback of this practice is the high frequency of multiple pregnancies. This problem leads to economic and health problems. Therefore, the transfer of a single embryo with high implantation potential is the ideal strategy. Morphometric evaluation of two-pronucleus zygote images is a helpful technique when aiming to transfer a single embryo with a high implantation potential. In this study, an automated zygote morphometric evaluation algorithm, called the zygote morphology evaluation (ZME) algorithm, was created to analyze the zygote and provide morphological measurements. The first and most crucial step of the ZME algorithm is the noise reduction step, which was first applied to zygote images. After that, the proposed algorithm detects different parts of the zygote that are indicators of embryo viability and normality, that is the oolemma, perivitelline space, zona pellucida, and nucleolar precursor bodies (NPBs). In addition, a novel dataset was prepared for this task. This dataset consisted of 703 human zygote images, and called the human zygote morphometric evaluation dataset (HZME-DS). Our experimental results in the HZME-DS showed that the ZME algorithm was able to achieve 79.58% average accuracy in identifying the oolemma region, 79.40% average accuracy in determining the perivitelline space, and 79.72% accuracy in identifying the zona pellucida. To calculate the accuracy of identifying NPBs, the proposed algorithm uses Recall and Precision measures, and their harmonic average (F1 measure) reached values of 81.14% and 79.53%, respectively. These encouraging results for our proposed method, which is an automatic and very fast method, showed that the ZME algorithm could help embryologists to evaluate the best zygotes in real time and the best embryos subsequently.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. Morphological measures in the zygote.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Diagram of the zygote morphology examination (ZME).

Figure 2

Figure 3. Details of each step in the proposed method.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Some samples of the human zygote morphometric evaluation dataset (HZME-DS) images.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Extracting the aim regions manually. (a) Extraction of oolemma section/area. (b) Extraction of zona pellucida section. (c) Extraction of the perivitelline space region. (d) Extraction of nucleolar precursor bodies (NPBs).

Figure 5

Table 1. Confusion matrix

Figure 6

Figure 6. Pre-processing steps: noise reduction. (a) Input image. (b) Converting the colour space from RGB to YCbCr. (c) The Y dimension. (d) Image sharpening. (e) Gaussian filtering. (f) Wavelet transformation.

Figure 7

Figure 7. Oolemma detection. (a) Converting the colour space to greyscale. (b) Removing small regions. (c) Filling the holes. (d) Oolemma region detected.

Figure 8

Figure 8. Perivitelline space and zona pellucida detection. (a) Denoized image. (b) FCM output image. (c) Zona pellucida. (d) Perivitelline space.

Figure 9

Figure 9. NPBs detection. (a) Input image. (b) Detected nucleolar precursor bodies (NPBs).

Figure 10

Table 2. F-measure value for oolemma detection, zona pellucida, and the perivitelline space

Figure 11

Table 3. Accuracy of oolemma, zona pellucida, and perivitelline space detection

Figure 12

Figure 10. Accuracy of nucleolar precursor body (NPB) detection.