Artificial Intelligence to Differentiate Pediatric Pseudopapilledema and True Papilledema on Fundus Photographs

IF 3.2 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Melinda Y. Chang MD , Gena Heidary MD, PhD , Shannon Beres MD , Stacy L. Pineles MD , Eric D. Gaier MD, PhD , Ryan Gise MD , Mark Reid PhD , Kleanthis Avramidis MEng , Mohammad Rostami PhD , Shrikanth Narayanan PhD , Pediatric Optic Nerve Investigator Group (PONIG)
{"title":"Artificial Intelligence to Differentiate Pediatric Pseudopapilledema and True Papilledema on Fundus Photographs","authors":"Melinda Y. Chang MD ,&nbsp;Gena Heidary MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Shannon Beres MD ,&nbsp;Stacy L. Pineles MD ,&nbsp;Eric D. Gaier MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Ryan Gise MD ,&nbsp;Mark Reid PhD ,&nbsp;Kleanthis Avramidis MEng ,&nbsp;Mohammad Rostami PhD ,&nbsp;Shrikanth Narayanan PhD ,&nbsp;Pediatric Optic Nerve Investigator Group (PONIG)","doi":"10.1016/j.xops.2024.100496","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To develop and test an artificial intelligence (AI) model to aid in differentiating pediatric pseudopapilledema from true papilledema on fundus photographs.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>Multicenter retrospective study.</p></div><div><h3>Subjects</h3><p>A total of 851 fundus photographs from 235 children (age &lt; 18 years) with pseudopapilledema and true papilledema.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Four pediatric neuro-ophthalmologists at 4 different institutions contributed fundus photographs of children with confirmed diagnoses of papilledema or pseudopapilledema. An AI model to classify fundus photographs as papilledema or pseudopapilledema was developed using a DenseNet backbone and a tribranch convolutional neural network. We performed 10-fold cross-validation and separately analyzed an external test set. The AI model’s performance was compared with 2 masked human expert pediatric neuro-ophthalmologists, who performed the same classification task.</p></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><p>Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the AI model compared with human experts.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The area under receiver operating curve of the AI model was 0.77 for the cross-validation set and 0.81 for the external test set. The accuracy of the AI model was 70.0% for the cross-validation set and 73.9% for the external test set. The sensitivity of the AI model was 73.4% for the cross-validation set and 90.4% for the external test set. The AI model’s accuracy was significantly higher than human experts on the cross validation set (<em>P</em> &lt; 0.002), and the model’s sensitivity was significantly higher on the external test set (<em>P</em> = 0.0002). The specificity of the AI model and human experts was similar (56.4%–67.3%). Moreover, the AI model was significantly more sensitive at detecting mild papilledema than human experts, whereas AI and humans performed similarly on photographs of moderate-to-severe papilledema. On review of the external test set, only 1 child (with nearly resolved pseudotumor cerebri) had both eyes with papilledema incorrectly classified as pseudopapilledema.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>When classifying fundus photographs of pediatric papilledema and pseudopapilledema, our AI model achieved &gt; 90% sensitivity at detecting papilledema, superior to human experts. Due to the high sensitivity and low false negative rate, AI may be useful to triage children with suspected papilledema requiring work-up to evaluate for serious underlying neurologic conditions.</p></div><div><h3>Financial Disclosure(s)</h3><p>Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74363,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666914524000320/pdfft?md5=a4155e55d0289e14935dfa99b5052346&pid=1-s2.0-S2666914524000320-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666914524000320","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

To develop and test an artificial intelligence (AI) model to aid in differentiating pediatric pseudopapilledema from true papilledema on fundus photographs.

Design

Multicenter retrospective study.

Subjects

A total of 851 fundus photographs from 235 children (age < 18 years) with pseudopapilledema and true papilledema.

Methods

Four pediatric neuro-ophthalmologists at 4 different institutions contributed fundus photographs of children with confirmed diagnoses of papilledema or pseudopapilledema. An AI model to classify fundus photographs as papilledema or pseudopapilledema was developed using a DenseNet backbone and a tribranch convolutional neural network. We performed 10-fold cross-validation and separately analyzed an external test set. The AI model’s performance was compared with 2 masked human expert pediatric neuro-ophthalmologists, who performed the same classification task.

Main Outcome Measures

Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the AI model compared with human experts.

Results

The area under receiver operating curve of the AI model was 0.77 for the cross-validation set and 0.81 for the external test set. The accuracy of the AI model was 70.0% for the cross-validation set and 73.9% for the external test set. The sensitivity of the AI model was 73.4% for the cross-validation set and 90.4% for the external test set. The AI model’s accuracy was significantly higher than human experts on the cross validation set (P < 0.002), and the model’s sensitivity was significantly higher on the external test set (P = 0.0002). The specificity of the AI model and human experts was similar (56.4%–67.3%). Moreover, the AI model was significantly more sensitive at detecting mild papilledema than human experts, whereas AI and humans performed similarly on photographs of moderate-to-severe papilledema. On review of the external test set, only 1 child (with nearly resolved pseudotumor cerebri) had both eyes with papilledema incorrectly classified as pseudopapilledema.

Conclusions

When classifying fundus photographs of pediatric papilledema and pseudopapilledema, our AI model achieved > 90% sensitivity at detecting papilledema, superior to human experts. Due to the high sensitivity and low false negative rate, AI may be useful to triage children with suspected papilledema requiring work-up to evaluate for serious underlying neurologic conditions.

Financial Disclosure(s)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

人工智能区分眼底照片上的小儿假性脑膜水肿和真性脑膜水肿
目的开发并测试一种人工智能(AI)模型,以帮助在眼底照片上区分小儿假性乳头水肿和真性乳头水肿。方法4家不同机构的4位小儿神经眼科医生提供了确诊为乳头水肿或假性乳头水肿的儿童眼底照片。我们使用 DenseNet 主干网和三分支卷积神经网络开发了一个人工智能模型,用于将眼底照片分类为乳头水肿或假性乳头水肿。我们进行了 10 倍交叉验证,并单独分析了外部测试集。将人工智能模型的性能与两名蒙面的人类小儿神经眼科专家的性能进行了比较,他们执行的是相同的分类任务。交叉验证集的人工智能模型准确率为 70.0%,外部测试集的准确率为 73.9%。人工智能模型的灵敏度在交叉验证集上为 73.4%,在外部测试集上为 90.4%。在交叉验证集上,人工智能模型的准确率明显高于人类专家(P <0.002),在外部测试集上,人工智能模型的灵敏度明显高于人类专家(P = 0.0002)。人工智能模型和人类专家的特异性相似(56.4%-67.3%)。此外,在检测轻度乳头水肿方面,人工智能模型的灵敏度明显高于人类专家,而在检测中重度乳头水肿照片方面,人工智能和人类专家的表现相似。结论在对小儿乳头水肿和假性乳头水肿的眼底照片进行分类时,我们的人工智能模型检测乳头水肿的灵敏度达到了 90%,优于人类专家。由于灵敏度高、假阴性率低,人工智能可能有助于对疑似乳头水肿的儿童进行分流,以评估是否存在严重的潜在神经系统疾病。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ophthalmology science
Ophthalmology science Ophthalmology
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
89 days
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信