Maria Cristina Savastano, Emanuele Crincoli, Alfonso Savastano, Alessandro Gravina, Matteo Mario Carlà, Clara Rizzo, Raphael Kilian, Stanislao Rizzo
{"title":"Comparison of effectiveness of geographic atrophy automatic segmentation with different imaging methods.","authors":"Maria Cristina Savastano, Emanuele Crincoli, Alfonso Savastano, Alessandro Gravina, Matteo Mario Carlà, Clara Rizzo, Raphael Kilian, Stanislao Rizzo","doi":"10.1038/s41433-025-03794-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare geographic atrophy (GA) size measured with fundus autofluorescence (FAF), near-infrared (N-IR) imaging, retromode (RM) imaging and optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) imaging and to compare accuracy of artificial intelligence(AI)-based automatic segmentation of GA with each method.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Available good quality FAF, N-IR- RM and OCTA images acquired on the same date for each patient diagnosed with GA from 2022 to 2024 were retrospectively collected. Seventy(70)% of the images were used to train a Trainable Weka Segmenter (v 3.3.2) based on manual segmentation of GA and spurious areas performed by 2 different blinded expert graders for each of the 4 imaging modalities. For the remaining 30%(testing set), automatic measurement and manual measurement were compared to determine accuracy of the segmentation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 157 eyes were included. Mean ground truth GA area (graders' manual contouring), mean automatic area and mean spurious area of testing set were significantly different with the 4 techniques(respectively p < 0.001, p < 0.001 and p = 0.002). Intraclass correlation coefficient(ICC) between manual and automatic measurements was 0.82 (0.78-0.84) for FAF model, 0.81 (0.78-0.82) for N-IR model, 0.67 (0.64-0.71) for RM model and 0.77 (0.73-0.81) for OCTA model.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We report very good performance of automatic segmentation performed on FAF, N-IR and OCTA. A slight overestimation of GA area with automatic measurements would be considered when assessing GA area on FAF and N-IR imaging. RM imaging should not be considered as a valid method for automatic GA area assessment due to superiority of other available enface imaging techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":12125,"journal":{"name":"Eye","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eye","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-025-03794-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","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 compare geographic atrophy (GA) size measured with fundus autofluorescence (FAF), near-infrared (N-IR) imaging, retromode (RM) imaging and optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) imaging and to compare accuracy of artificial intelligence(AI)-based automatic segmentation of GA with each method.
Methods: Available good quality FAF, N-IR- RM and OCTA images acquired on the same date for each patient diagnosed with GA from 2022 to 2024 were retrospectively collected. Seventy(70)% of the images were used to train a Trainable Weka Segmenter (v 3.3.2) based on manual segmentation of GA and spurious areas performed by 2 different blinded expert graders for each of the 4 imaging modalities. For the remaining 30%(testing set), automatic measurement and manual measurement were compared to determine accuracy of the segmentation.
Results: A total of 157 eyes were included. Mean ground truth GA area (graders' manual contouring), mean automatic area and mean spurious area of testing set were significantly different with the 4 techniques(respectively p < 0.001, p < 0.001 and p = 0.002). Intraclass correlation coefficient(ICC) between manual and automatic measurements was 0.82 (0.78-0.84) for FAF model, 0.81 (0.78-0.82) for N-IR model, 0.67 (0.64-0.71) for RM model and 0.77 (0.73-0.81) for OCTA model.
Conclusion: We report very good performance of automatic segmentation performed on FAF, N-IR and OCTA. A slight overestimation of GA area with automatic measurements would be considered when assessing GA area on FAF and N-IR imaging. RM imaging should not be considered as a valid method for automatic GA area assessment due to superiority of other available enface imaging techniques.
期刊介绍:
Eye seeks to provide the international practising ophthalmologist with high quality articles, of academic rigour, on the latest global clinical and laboratory based research. Its core aim is to advance the science and practice of ophthalmology with the latest clinical- and scientific-based research. Whilst principally aimed at the practising clinician, the journal contains material of interest to a wider readership including optometrists, orthoptists, other health care professionals and research workers in all aspects of the field of visual science worldwide. Eye is the official journal of The Royal College of Ophthalmologists.
Eye encourages the submission of original articles covering all aspects of ophthalmology including: external eye disease; oculo-plastic surgery; orbital and lacrimal disease; ocular surface and corneal disorders; paediatric ophthalmology and strabismus; glaucoma; medical and surgical retina; neuro-ophthalmology; cataract and refractive surgery; ocular oncology; ophthalmic pathology; ophthalmic genetics.