Forme Fruste Keratoconus Detection with OCT Corneal Topography Using Artificial Intelligence Algorithms.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Eugénie Mourgues, Virgile Saunier, David Smadja, David Touboul, Valentine Saunier
{"title":"Forme Fruste Keratoconus Detection with OCT Corneal Topography Using Artificial Intelligence Algorithms.","authors":"Eugénie Mourgues, Virgile Saunier, David Smadja, David Touboul, Valentine Saunier","doi":"10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001542","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Distinguishing early Keratoconus (KC) from normal corneas is challenging owing to their striking similarities. The aim of our study was to identify discriminating parameters to differentiate a normal cornea from a Form Fruste Keratoconus (FFKC) with the Swept-Source (SS) OCT-topography CASIA 2 (Tomey,Japan) using machine learning artificial intelligence algorithms.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>The study was monocentric, carried out in Bordeaux.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This was a retrospective study, case control.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three groups were included: KC group (108 eyes), FFKC (88 eyes) and normal corneas (162 eyes).The data were analyzed and processed using the Dataiku data science platform. Machine learning models (Random Forest, Logistic Regression) were used to develop a multiclass classifier for automated early KC detection. The models were trained using a training database and tested using a test database. Then algorithms were compared to the Ectasia Screening Index (ESI), which is an OCT-topography inherent screening score for ectasia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The Logistic Regression (LR), and Random Forest (RF) detected FFKC with an AUC of 0,99, and 0,98 respectively. The sensitivities of LR (100%), RF (84%) were better than the ESI (28%) for the diagnosis of FFKC. However, ESI has a maximum specificity (100%) compared to the RL (100%) and 90% for RF.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study identified discriminating topographic parameters to be considered in refractive surgery screening on SS-OCT CASIA 2. We developed an algorithm capable of classifying normal eyes versus FFKC cases, with improved performance compared to the ESI score.</p>","PeriodicalId":15214,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11556849/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cataract and refractive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/j.jcrs.0000000000001542","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Distinguishing early Keratoconus (KC) from normal corneas is challenging owing to their striking similarities. The aim of our study was to identify discriminating parameters to differentiate a normal cornea from a Form Fruste Keratoconus (FFKC) with the Swept-Source (SS) OCT-topography CASIA 2 (Tomey,Japan) using machine learning artificial intelligence algorithms.

Setting: The study was monocentric, carried out in Bordeaux.

Design: This was a retrospective study, case control.

Methods: Three groups were included: KC group (108 eyes), FFKC (88 eyes) and normal corneas (162 eyes).The data were analyzed and processed using the Dataiku data science platform. Machine learning models (Random Forest, Logistic Regression) were used to develop a multiclass classifier for automated early KC detection. The models were trained using a training database and tested using a test database. Then algorithms were compared to the Ectasia Screening Index (ESI), which is an OCT-topography inherent screening score for ectasia.

Results: The Logistic Regression (LR), and Random Forest (RF) detected FFKC with an AUC of 0,99, and 0,98 respectively. The sensitivities of LR (100%), RF (84%) were better than the ESI (28%) for the diagnosis of FFKC. However, ESI has a maximum specificity (100%) compared to the RL (100%) and 90% for RF.

Conclusion: This study identified discriminating topographic parameters to be considered in refractive surgery screening on SS-OCT CASIA 2. We developed an algorithm capable of classifying normal eyes versus FFKC cases, with improved performance compared to the ESI score.

利用人工智能算法通过 OCT 角膜地形图检测软骨角膜病。
目的:由于早期角膜病(KC)与正常角膜惊人的相似性,因此区分它们具有挑战性。我们的研究旨在利用机器学习人工智能算法,通过扫描源(SS)OCT 角膜成像仪 CASIA 2(日本东美公司),确定区分正常角膜和 Form Fruste Keratoconus(FFKC)的鉴别参数:研究以波尔多为中心:设计:这是一项病例对照的回顾性研究:方法:分为三组:数据使用 Dataiku 数据科学平台进行分析和处理。数据使用 Dataiku 数据科学平台进行分析和处理。机器学习模型(随机森林、逻辑回归)用于开发多类分类器,以自动检测早期 KC。使用训练数据库对模型进行训练,并使用测试数据库对模型进行测试。然后将算法与外生殖器筛查指数(ESI)进行比较,ESI 是外生殖器的 OCT 拓扑固有筛查评分:逻辑回归(LR)和随机森林(RF)检测出的 FFKC 的 AUC 分别为 0.99 和 0.98。在诊断 FFKC 方面,LR(100%)和 RF(84%)的灵敏度优于 ESI(28%)。然而,ESI 的特异性最高(100%),而 LR 为 100%,RF 为 90%:我们开发了一种能够将正常眼与 FFKC 病例进行分类的算法,与 ESI 评分相比,其性能有所提高。
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
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
259
审稿时长
8.5 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cataract & Refractive Surgery (JCRS), a preeminent peer-reviewed monthly ophthalmology publication, is the official journal of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) and the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons (ESCRS). JCRS publishes high quality articles on all aspects of anterior segment surgery. In addition to original clinical studies, the journal features a consultation section, practical techniques, important cases, and reviews as well as basic science articles.
×
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