在糖尿病视网膜病变筛查项目中,AirDoc 便携式视网膜照相机与 eyer 的图像质量比较。

IF 1.9 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Rodrigo Brant, Luis Filipe Nakayama, Talita Virgínia Fernandes de Oliveira, Juliana Angelica Estevão de Oliveira, Lucas Zago Ribeiro, Gabriela Dalmedico Richter, Rafael Rodacki, Fernando Marcondes Penha
{"title":"在糖尿病视网膜病变筛查项目中,AirDoc 便携式视网膜照相机与 eyer 的图像质量比较。","authors":"Rodrigo Brant, Luis Filipe Nakayama, Talita Virgínia Fernandes de Oliveira, Juliana Angelica Estevão de Oliveira, Lucas Zago Ribeiro, Gabriela Dalmedico Richter, Rafael Rodacki, Fernando Marcondes Penha","doi":"10.1186/s40942-024-00559-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Diabetic retinopathy (DR) stands as the foremost cause of preventable blindness in adults. Despite efforts to expand DR screening coverage in the Brazilian public healthcare system, challenges persist due to various factors including social, medical, and financial constraints. Our objective was to evaluate the quality of images obtained with the AirDoc, a novel device, compared to Eyer portable camera which has already been clinically validated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Images were captured by two portable retinal devices: AirDoc and Eyer. The included patients had their fundus images obtained in a screening program conducted in Blumenau, Santa Catarina. Two retina specialists independently assessed image's quality. A comparison was performed between both devices regarding image quality and the presence of artifacts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis included 129 patients (mean age of 61 years), with 29 (43.28%) male and an average disease duration of 11.1 ± 8 years. In Ardoc, 21 (16.28%) images were classified as poor quality, with 88 (68%) presenting artifacts; in Eyer, 4 (3.1%) images were classified as poor quality, with 94 (72.87%) presenting artifacts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although both Eyer and AirDoc devices show potential as screening tools, the AirDoc images displayed higher rates of ungradable and low-quality images, that may directly affect the DR and DME grading. We must acknowledge the limitations of our study, including the relatively small sample size. Therefore, the interpretations of our analyses should be approached with caution, and further investigations with larger patient cohorts are warranted to validate our findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":14289,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Retina and Vitreous","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11177418/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Image quality comparison of AirDoc portable retina camera versus eyer in a diabetic retinopathy screening program.\",\"authors\":\"Rodrigo Brant, Luis Filipe Nakayama, Talita Virgínia Fernandes de Oliveira, Juliana Angelica Estevão de Oliveira, Lucas Zago Ribeiro, Gabriela Dalmedico Richter, Rafael Rodacki, Fernando Marcondes Penha\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40942-024-00559-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Diabetic retinopathy (DR) stands as the foremost cause of preventable blindness in adults. Despite efforts to expand DR screening coverage in the Brazilian public healthcare system, challenges persist due to various factors including social, medical, and financial constraints. Our objective was to evaluate the quality of images obtained with the AirDoc, a novel device, compared to Eyer portable camera which has already been clinically validated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Images were captured by two portable retinal devices: AirDoc and Eyer. The included patients had their fundus images obtained in a screening program conducted in Blumenau, Santa Catarina. Two retina specialists independently assessed image's quality. A comparison was performed between both devices regarding image quality and the presence of artifacts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis included 129 patients (mean age of 61 years), with 29 (43.28%) male and an average disease duration of 11.1 ± 8 years. In Ardoc, 21 (16.28%) images were classified as poor quality, with 88 (68%) presenting artifacts; in Eyer, 4 (3.1%) images were classified as poor quality, with 94 (72.87%) presenting artifacts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although both Eyer and AirDoc devices show potential as screening tools, the AirDoc images displayed higher rates of ungradable and low-quality images, that may directly affect the DR and DME grading. We must acknowledge the limitations of our study, including the relatively small sample size. Therefore, the interpretations of our analyses should be approached with caution, and further investigations with larger patient cohorts are warranted to validate our findings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14289,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Retina and Vitreous\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11177418/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Retina and Vitreous\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40942-024-00559-z\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Retina and Vitreous","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40942-024-00559-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:糖尿病视网膜病变(DR糖尿病视网膜病变(DR)是导致成人可预防性失明的首要原因。尽管巴西公共医疗系统努力扩大糖尿病视网膜病变筛查的覆盖范围,但由于社会、医疗和财政限制等各种因素,挑战依然存在。我们的目标是评估新型设备 AirDoc 与已经过临床验证的 Eyer 便携式照相机相比所获得图像的质量:方法:使用两种便携式视网膜设备采集图像:方法:使用 AirDoc 和 Eyer 两种便携式视网膜设备采集图像。这些患者的眼底图像是在圣卡塔琳娜州布卢梅瑙市开展的筛查项目中获得的。两名视网膜专家对图像质量进行了独立评估。对两种设备的图像质量和是否存在伪影进行了比较:分析包括 129 名患者(平均年龄 61 岁),其中男性 29 人(43.28%),平均病程为 11.1 ± 8 年。在 Ardoc 中,21 张(16.28%)图像被归类为质量差,其中 88 张(68%)出现伪影;在 Eyer 中,4 张(3.1%)图像被归类为质量差,其中 94 张(72.87%)出现伪影:尽管 Eyer 和 AirDoc 设备都显示出作为筛查工具的潜力,但 AirDoc 图像显示出更高的不可分级率和低质量图像率,这可能会直接影响 DR 和 DME 的分级。我们必须承认我们的研究存在局限性,包括样本量相对较小。因此,在解释我们的分析结果时应谨慎,而且有必要对更大的患者群体进行进一步调查,以验证我们的研究结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Image quality comparison of AirDoc portable retina camera versus eyer in a diabetic retinopathy screening program.

Background: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) stands as the foremost cause of preventable blindness in adults. Despite efforts to expand DR screening coverage in the Brazilian public healthcare system, challenges persist due to various factors including social, medical, and financial constraints. Our objective was to evaluate the quality of images obtained with the AirDoc, a novel device, compared to Eyer portable camera which has already been clinically validated.

Methods: Images were captured by two portable retinal devices: AirDoc and Eyer. The included patients had their fundus images obtained in a screening program conducted in Blumenau, Santa Catarina. Two retina specialists independently assessed image's quality. A comparison was performed between both devices regarding image quality and the presence of artifacts.

Results: The analysis included 129 patients (mean age of 61 years), with 29 (43.28%) male and an average disease duration of 11.1 ± 8 years. In Ardoc, 21 (16.28%) images were classified as poor quality, with 88 (68%) presenting artifacts; in Eyer, 4 (3.1%) images were classified as poor quality, with 94 (72.87%) presenting artifacts.

Conclusions: Although both Eyer and AirDoc devices show potential as screening tools, the AirDoc images displayed higher rates of ungradable and low-quality images, that may directly affect the DR and DME grading. We must acknowledge the limitations of our study, including the relatively small sample size. Therefore, the interpretations of our analyses should be approached with caution, and further investigations with larger patient cohorts are warranted to validate our findings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.30%
发文量
81
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Retina and Vitreous focuses on the ophthalmic subspecialty of vitreoretinal disorders. The journal presents original articles on new approaches to diagnosis, outcomes of clinical trials, innovations in pharmacological therapy and surgical techniques, as well as basic science advances that impact clinical practice. Topical areas include, but are not limited to: -Imaging of the retina, choroid and vitreous -Innovations in optical coherence tomography (OCT) -Small-gauge vitrectomy, retinal detachment, chromovitrectomy -Electroretinography (ERG), microperimetry, other functional tests -Intraocular tumors -Retinal pharmacotherapy & drug delivery -Diabetic retinopathy & other vascular diseases -Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) & other macular entities
×
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