利用视网膜厚度测量的像素分析检测青光眼结构损伤的诊断性能。

IF 5 2区 医学 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Hongli Yang, Juan Reynaud, Glen P Sharpe, Dawn Jennings, Cindy Albert, Trinity Holthausen, Xiue Jiang, Shaban Demirel, Steven L Mansberger, Marcelo T Nicolela, Stuart K Gardiner, Balwantray C Chauhan, Claude F Burgoyne, Brad Fortune
{"title":"利用视网膜厚度测量的像素分析检测青光眼结构损伤的诊断性能。","authors":"Hongli Yang, Juan Reynaud, Glen P Sharpe, Dawn Jennings, Cindy Albert, Trinity Holthausen, Xiue Jiang, Shaban Demirel, Steven L Mansberger, Marcelo T Nicolela, Stuart K Gardiner, Balwantray C Chauhan, Claude F Burgoyne, Brad Fortune","doi":"10.1167/iovs.65.12.17","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the diagnostic accuracy of thickness measurements of individual and combined macular retinal layers to discriminate 188 glaucomatous and 148 glaucoma suspect eyes from 362 healthy control (HC) eyes on a pixel-by-pixel basis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For this retrospective study, we manually corrected the segmentations of posterior pole optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans to determine the thickness of the nerve fiber layer (NFL), ganglion cell layer (GCL), inner plexiform layer (IPL), the ganglion cell complex (GCC), and the total neural retina (TR). For each eye, the total number of pixels with thickness values less than the fifth percentile of the HC distribution was used to create a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for each layer and for layer combinations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Using total abnormal pixel count criteria to discriminate glaucoma from HC eyes, the individual layers with the highest area under the ROC curve (AUC) were the NFL and GCL; IPL performance was significantly lower (P < 0.05). GCC had a significant higher AUC (94.3%) than individual the AUC of the NFL (92.3%) (P = 0.0231) but not higher than AUC of the GCL (93.4%) (P = 0.3487). The highest AUC (95.4%) and sensitivity (85.1%) at 95% specificity was found for the Boolean combination of NFL or GCL. The highest AUC is not significantly higher (P = 0.0882) than the AUC of the GCC but the highest sensitivity is significantly higher than the sensitivity of the GCC. This pattern was similar for discriminating between suspect and HC eyes (P = 0.0356).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Using pixel-based methods, the diagnostic accuracy of NFL and GCL exceeded that of IPL and TR. GCC had equivalent performance as NFL and GCL. The specific spatial locations within the posterior pole that exhibit best performance vary depending on which layer is being assessed. Recognizing this dependency highlights the importance of considering multiple layers independently, as they offer complementary information for effective and comprehensive diagnosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":14620,"journal":{"name":"Investigative ophthalmology & visual science","volume":"65 12","pages":"17"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11469280/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic Performance for Detection of Glaucomatous Structural Damage Using Pixelwise Analysis of Retinal Thickness Measurements.\",\"authors\":\"Hongli Yang, Juan Reynaud, Glen P Sharpe, Dawn Jennings, Cindy Albert, Trinity Holthausen, Xiue Jiang, Shaban Demirel, Steven L Mansberger, Marcelo T Nicolela, Stuart K Gardiner, Balwantray C Chauhan, Claude F Burgoyne, Brad Fortune\",\"doi\":\"10.1167/iovs.65.12.17\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the diagnostic accuracy of thickness measurements of individual and combined macular retinal layers to discriminate 188 glaucomatous and 148 glaucoma suspect eyes from 362 healthy control (HC) eyes on a pixel-by-pixel basis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>For this retrospective study, we manually corrected the segmentations of posterior pole optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans to determine the thickness of the nerve fiber layer (NFL), ganglion cell layer (GCL), inner plexiform layer (IPL), the ganglion cell complex (GCC), and the total neural retina (TR). For each eye, the total number of pixels with thickness values less than the fifth percentile of the HC distribution was used to create a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for each layer and for layer combinations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Using total abnormal pixel count criteria to discriminate glaucoma from HC eyes, the individual layers with the highest area under the ROC curve (AUC) were the NFL and GCL; IPL performance was significantly lower (P < 0.05). GCC had a significant higher AUC (94.3%) than individual the AUC of the NFL (92.3%) (P = 0.0231) but not higher than AUC of the GCL (93.4%) (P = 0.3487). The highest AUC (95.4%) and sensitivity (85.1%) at 95% specificity was found for the Boolean combination of NFL or GCL. The highest AUC is not significantly higher (P = 0.0882) than the AUC of the GCC but the highest sensitivity is significantly higher than the sensitivity of the GCC. This pattern was similar for discriminating between suspect and HC eyes (P = 0.0356).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Using pixel-based methods, the diagnostic accuracy of NFL and GCL exceeded that of IPL and TR. GCC had equivalent performance as NFL and GCL. The specific spatial locations within the posterior pole that exhibit best performance vary depending on which layer is being assessed. Recognizing this dependency highlights the importance of considering multiple layers independently, as they offer complementary information for effective and comprehensive diagnosis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14620,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Investigative ophthalmology & visual science\",\"volume\":\"65 12\",\"pages\":\"17\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11469280/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Investigative ophthalmology & visual science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.65.12.17\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Investigative ophthalmology & visual science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.65.12.17","RegionNum":2,"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

摘要

目的:比较单个黄斑视网膜层和组合黄斑视网膜层厚度测量的诊断准确性,以逐个像素为基础从362只健康对照(HC)眼中区分出188只青光眼眼和148只青光眼疑似眼:在这项回顾性研究中,我们手动校正了后极光学相干断层扫描(OCT)的分割,以确定神经纤维层(NFL)、神经节细胞层(GCL)、内丛膜层(IPL)、神经节细胞复合体(GCC)和总神经视网膜(TR)的厚度。对于每只眼睛,厚度值小于 HC 分布第五百分位数的像素总数被用来创建每层和各层组合的接收者操作特征曲线(ROC):使用异常像素总数标准来区分青光眼和HC眼,ROC曲线下面积(AUC)最高的单层是NFL和GCL;IPL的表现明显较低(P<0.05)。GCC 的 AUC(94.3%)明显高于 NFL 的 AUC(92.3%)(P = 0.0231),但不高于 GCL 的 AUC(93.4%)(P = 0.3487)。在 95% 的特异性条件下,NFL 或 GCL 的布尔组合的 AUC(95.4%)和灵敏度(85.1%)最高。最高的 AUC 并未明显高于 GCC 的 AUC(P = 0.0882),但最高的灵敏度却明显高于 GCC 的灵敏度。这种模式在区分可疑眼和 HC 眼时也类似(P = 0.0356):结论:使用基于像素的方法,NFL 和 GCL 的诊断准确性超过了 IPL 和 TR。GCC 的性能与 NFL 和 GCL 相当。后极部表现出最佳性能的特定空间位置因所评估的层而异。认识到这种依赖性突出了独立考虑多层的重要性,因为它们为有效和全面的诊断提供了互补信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Diagnostic Performance for Detection of Glaucomatous Structural Damage Using Pixelwise Analysis of Retinal Thickness Measurements.

Purpose: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of thickness measurements of individual and combined macular retinal layers to discriminate 188 glaucomatous and 148 glaucoma suspect eyes from 362 healthy control (HC) eyes on a pixel-by-pixel basis.

Methods: For this retrospective study, we manually corrected the segmentations of posterior pole optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans to determine the thickness of the nerve fiber layer (NFL), ganglion cell layer (GCL), inner plexiform layer (IPL), the ganglion cell complex (GCC), and the total neural retina (TR). For each eye, the total number of pixels with thickness values less than the fifth percentile of the HC distribution was used to create a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for each layer and for layer combinations.

Results: Using total abnormal pixel count criteria to discriminate glaucoma from HC eyes, the individual layers with the highest area under the ROC curve (AUC) were the NFL and GCL; IPL performance was significantly lower (P < 0.05). GCC had a significant higher AUC (94.3%) than individual the AUC of the NFL (92.3%) (P = 0.0231) but not higher than AUC of the GCL (93.4%) (P = 0.3487). The highest AUC (95.4%) and sensitivity (85.1%) at 95% specificity was found for the Boolean combination of NFL or GCL. The highest AUC is not significantly higher (P = 0.0882) than the AUC of the GCC but the highest sensitivity is significantly higher than the sensitivity of the GCC. This pattern was similar for discriminating between suspect and HC eyes (P = 0.0356).

Conclusions: Using pixel-based methods, the diagnostic accuracy of NFL and GCL exceeded that of IPL and TR. GCC had equivalent performance as NFL and GCL. The specific spatial locations within the posterior pole that exhibit best performance vary depending on which layer is being assessed. Recognizing this dependency highlights the importance of considering multiple layers independently, as they offer complementary information for effective and comprehensive diagnosis.

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
6.90
自引率
4.50%
发文量
339
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science (IOVS), published as ready online, is a peer-reviewed academic journal of the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO). IOVS features original research, mostly pertaining to clinical and laboratory ophthalmology and vision research in general.
×
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