Review Article

Machine Learning in Detection and Classification of Leukemia Using Smear Blood Images: A Systematic Review

Table 3

Studies that used ML algorithms for blast segmentation.

AuthorType of feature extractedML segmentation techniqueNo. of data and detailsPerformance (accuracy %)

Begum and Razak [52]Morphological operations erosion, dilation, opening, and closing of nucleiSVMNot mentioned83%

Jothi et al. [53]Morphological, wavelet, color, texture, and statistical features, and other featuresNaıve Bayes, linear discriminant analysis, K-nearest neighbor, support vector machine, decision tree, and ensemble random under sampling boost300(60%–100%)

Gajul and Shelke [54]Not mentionedK-mean clustering and morphological operations40

Vogado et al. [22]Not identifiedAutomatic feature extractionThree datasets99%

Agaian et al. [55]Color, texture, shape, and Hausdorff dimension featureUsing k-means clustering8098%

Negm et al. [51]Geometric, color, texture, and size feature of blastUsing k-means clustering7599.5%

Su et al. [39]Color and morphology featuresk-means cluster and constructing a cell image by hidden Markov random field6196%

Goutam and Sailaja [56]LDP featureUsing k-means clustering9098%

Shankar et al. [57]Color, shape, and textureThreshold by using the Zack algorithm3396%

Viswanathan [46]Morphological contour (edge detection, erosion, and dilation)Fuzzy c-means98%

Patel and Mishra [58]Geometric, color, texture, and size feature of cellK-mean clustering and the Zack algorithm793%

Zhao et al. [12]Morphological operation and granularity feature are selected automaticallyCNN and SVM994%

Karthikeyan and Poornima [59]Geometrical, texture, and colorFuzzy c-means1990%

MoradiAmin et al. [37]Geometrical and statistical featureFuzzy c-means2198%

Rawat et al. [60]Morphological operationGlobal thresholding and morphological opining260(79%–95.4%)

Mishra et al. [61]Texture and colorMarker-controlled watershed segmentation19096%

Bhattacharjee and Saini [36]Morphological operationMorphological operations erosion, dilation, opening, and closing12096%

Khobragade et al. [62]Geometrical and statisticalOtsus’s thresholding and Sobel operatorNot mentioned90%

Patil and Raskar [41]Color, shape, and textureThresholding by using Otsu’s methodNot mentionedNot mentioned

Rawat et al. [34]Shape featuresGlobal thresholding and morphological opining42096.75%

Neelam et al.Texture featuresK-mean clustering followed by expectation maximization algorithmNot mentioned80%

Singh et al. [63]Shape and texture featuresANNALL-IDB (no: 108)97.2%

Singhal and Singh [64]Texture featuresSVMALL-IDB (no: 260)93.8%

Zhang et al. [65]Shape featuresFuzzy systemLocal (not mentioned)Not mentioned

Neoh et al. [66]Shape, texture, and color featuresDempster–ShaferALL-IDB (no: 180)96.7%

Amin et al. [67]Shape and texture featuresSVMLocal (no: 21)97%

Viswanathan [46]Shape, color, and texture featuresFuzzy c-means classifierALL-IDB (no: 108)98.0%

Bhattacharjee and Saini [36]Shape featuresANNALL-IDB (no: 120)95.2%

ElDahshan et al. [68]Not mentionedFieldALL-IDB (no: 300)Not mentioned

Rawat et al. [60]Shape and texture featuresSVMALL-IDB (no: 196)89.8%

Putzu et al. [35]Shape, color, and texture featuresSVMALL-IDB (no: 267)92.0%

Mohapatra et al. [70]Shape and texture featuresEnsemble classifierLocal dataset (no: 104)94.7%

Nasir et al. [71]Shape and color featuresMLP_BRLocal dataset (no: 230)95.7%

Mohapatra et al. [72]Shape and texture featuresANNLocal dataset (no: 100)Not mentioned

Madhloom et al. [73]Shape and texture featureskNN clusteringLocal dataset (no: 260)92.5%

Pedreira et al. [74]Multiple clinical and laboratorial featuresANNLocal dataset (no: 189)98.2%