4.6 Article

Diagnostic accuracy of diabetic retinopathy grading by an artificial intelligence-enabled algorithm compared with a human standard for wide-field true-colour confocal scanning and standard digital retinal images

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 105, Issue 2, Pages 265-270

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2019-315394

Keywords

diagnostic tests; investigation; epidemiology; imaging; retina

Categories

Funding

  1. North East London Diabetes Eye Screening Programme
  2. Department of Health's NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology at Moorfields Eye Hospital
  3. UCL Institute of Ophthalmology
  4. Lowy Medical Research Institute
  5. Department of Ophthalmology and University Hospital, Universidad Autonoma de Nuevo Leon

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study compared the performance of an automated retinal image analysis software (ARIAS) and human grading for diabetic retinopathy screening, finding that the EyeArt identified diabetic retinopathy in EIDON images with similar sensitivity to standard images, serving as an alternative method for large-scale screening programs.
Background Photographic diabetic retinopathy screening requires labour-intensive grading of retinal images by humans. Automated retinal image analysis software (ARIAS) could provide an alternative to human grading. We compare the performance of an ARIAS using true-colour, wide-field confocal scanning images and standard fundus images in the English National Diabetic Eye Screening Programme (NDESP) against human grading. Methods Cross-sectional study with consecutive recruitment of patients attending annual diabetic eye screening. Imaging with mydriasis was performed (two-field protocol) with the EIDON platform (CenterVue, Padua, Italy) and standard NDESP cameras. Human grading was carried out according to NDESP protocol. Images were processed by EyeArt V.2.1.0 (Eyenuk Inc, Woodland Hills, California). The reference standard for analysis was the human grade of standard NDESP images. Results We included 1257 patients. Sensitivity estimates for retinopathy grades were: EIDON images; 92.27% (95% CI: 88.43% to 94.69%) for any retinopathy, 99% (95% CI: 95.35% to 100%) for vision-threatening retinopathy and 100% (95% CI: 61% to 100%) for proliferative retinopathy. For NDESP images: 92.26% (95% CI: 88.37% to 94.69%) for any retinopathy, 100% (95% CI: 99.53% to 100%) for vision-threatening retinopathy and 100% (95% CI: 61% to 100%) for proliferative retinopathy. One case of vision-threatening retinopathy (R1M1) was missed by the EyeArt when analysing the EIDON images, but identified by the human graders. The EyeArt identified all cases of vision-threatening retinopathy in the standard images. Conclusion EyeArt identified diabetic retinopathy in EIDON images with similar sensitivity to standard images in a large-scale screening programme, exceeding the sensitivity threshold recommended for a screening test. Further work to optimise the identification of 'no retinopathy' and to understand the differential lesion detection in the two imaging systems would enhance the use of these two innovative technologies in a diabetic retinopathy screening setting.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available