Abstract
Purpose
To assess the repeatability and reliability of semi-automated EyeMark Python program measurements compared to manual ImageJ image processing of anterior segment-optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) structures in healthy and keratoconus eyes.
Methods
Heidelberg AS-OCT was used to image 25 eyes from 14 healthy subjects and 25 eyes from 15 subjects with keratoconus between the ages of 20 and 80 years, collected prospectively, in this observational case–control study. Visual axis scan containing vertical fixation light beam was selected from the 15-line AS-OCT scan raster. Central corneal thickness (CCT), anterior corneal radius of curvature (ACRC), posterior corneal radius of curvature (PCRC), and truncated anterior vault (TAV) were measured using ImageJ software and the EyeMark Python program. MedCalc and R were used to calculate the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and generate Bland–Altman plots (BAP).
Results
When comparing the measurements of CCT, ACRC, PCRC, and TAV between manual ImageJ analysis and the EyeMark Python program, ICC values were consistently greater than 0.9, indicating excellent agreement. BAPs comparing the ImageJ and Python measurements of anterior segment structures show no systematic proportional bias and the average differences were near zero and within 95% of the limits of agreement.
Conclusions
Semi-automated tools may provide the necessary efficiency for point-of-care quantitative corneal analysis of raw AS-OCT images. The semi-automated EyeMark Python program offers a repeatable and reliable tool compared to manual ImageJ analysis for measuring anterior segment structures from AS-OCT images among individuals with keratoconus.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Davidson AE, Hayes S, Hardcastle AJ, Tuft SJ (2014) The pathogenesis of keratoconus. Eye (Lond) 28:189–195. https://doi.org/10.1038/EYE.2013.278
Mas Tur V, MacGregor C, Jayaswal R et al (2017) A review of keratoconus: Diagnosis, pathophysiology, and genetics. Surv Ophthalmol 62:770–783. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SURVOPHTHAL.2017.06.009
Shi Y (2016) Strategies for improving the early diagnosis of keratoconus. Clin Optom 8:13. https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTO.S63486
Fernández Pérez J, Valero Marcos A, Martínez Peña FJ (2014) Early diagnosis of keratoconus: what difference is it making? Br J Ophthalmol 98:1465. https://doi.org/10.1136/BJOPHTHALMOL-2014-305120
Zhang X, Munir SZ, Sami Karim SA, Munir WM (2021) A review of imaging modalities for detecting early keratoconus. Eye (Lond) 35:173–187. https://doi.org/10.1038/S41433-020-1039-1
Grewal DS, Brar GS, Grewal SPS (2010) Assessment of central corneal thickness in normal, keratoconus, and post-laser in situ keratomileusis eyes using Scheimpflug imaging, spectral domain optical coherence tomography, and ultrasound pachymetry. J Cataract Refract Surg 36:954–964. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCRS.2009.12.033
Müller M, Dahmen G, Pörksen E et al (2006) Anterior chamber angle measurement with optical coherence tomography: intraobserver and interobserver variability. J Cataract Refract Surg 32:1803–1808. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCRS.2006.07.014
Gokul A, Vellara HR, Patel D (2018) Advanced anterior segment imaging in keratoconus: a review. Clin Exp Ophthalmol 46:122–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/CEO.13108
National Institute of Health ImageJ User Guide - IJ 1.46r | Process Menu. https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/docs/guide/146-29.html. Accessed 6 Jun 2022
Sakata LM, Lavanya R, Friedman DS et al (2008) Assessment of the scleral spur in anterior segment optical coherence tomography images. Arch Ophthalmol 126:181–185. https://doi.org/10.1001/ARCHOPHTHALMOL.2007.46
Yeung D, Sorbara L (2018) Estimation of apical axial curvature using anterior segment optical coherent tomography compared to corneal topography. Cont Lens Anterior Eye 41:S56. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CLAE.2018.03.043
Seager FE, Wang J, Arora KS, Quigley HA (2014) The effect of scleral spur identification methods on structural measurements by anterior segment optical coherence tomography. J Glaucoma. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0B013E31829E55AE
van Rossum G, Drake FL (2009) Python 3 reference manual. CreateSpace, Scotts Valley
Alexander JL, Maripudi S, Kannan K et al (2021) Semiautomated assessment of anterior segment structures in pediatric glaucoma using quantitative ultrasound biomicroscopy. J Glaucoma 30:E222–E226. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0000000000001809
Fu H, Baskaran M, Xu Y et al (2019) A deep learning system for automated angle-closure detection in anterior segment optical coherence tomography images. Am J Ophthalmol 203:37–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AJO.2019.02.028
dos Santos VA, Schmetterer L, Stegmann H et al (2019) CorneaNet: fast segmentation of cornea OCT scans of healthy and keratoconic eyes using deep learning. Biomed Opt Express 10:622. https://doi.org/10.1364/BOE.10.000622
Schlegel Z, Hoang-Xuan T, Gatinel D (2008) Comparison of and correlation between anterior and posterior corneal elevation maps in normal eyes and keratoconus-suspect eyes. J Cataract Refract Surg 34:789–795. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCRS.2007.12.036
Kitazawa K, Itoi M, Yokota I et al (2018) Involvement of anterior and posterior corneal surface area imbalance in the pathological change of keratoconus. Sci Rep 8:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-33490-z
Reinstein DZ, Archer TJ, Gobbe M (2009) Corneal epithelial thickness profile in the diagnosis of keratoconus. J Refract Surg 25:604–610. https://doi.org/10.3928/1081597X-20090610-06
Spoerl E, Zubaty V, Raiskup-Wolf F, Pillunat LE (2007) Oestrogen-induced changes in biomechanics in the cornea as a possible reason for keratectasia. Br J Ophthalmol 91:1547. https://doi.org/10.1136/BJO.2007.124388
Aydin E, Demir HD, Demirturk F et al (2007) Corneal topographic changes in premenopausal and postmenopausal women. BMC Ophthalmol 7:1–4. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2415-7-9/FIGURES/1
Ang M, Baskaran M, Werkmeister RM et al (2018) Anterior segment optical coherence tomography. Prog Retin Eye Res 66:132–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PRETEYERES.2018.04.002
R Core Team (2021) R: A language and environment for statistical computing
Martin Bland J, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 327:307–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8
Wickham H (2009) ggplot2. ggplot2. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98141-3
Lin AN, Mohammed ISK, Munir WM et al (2021) Inter-rater reliability and repeatability of manual anterior segment optical coherence tomography image grading in keratoconus. Eye Contact Lens 47:494–499. https://doi.org/10.1097/ICL.0000000000000818
Mohammed ISK, Tran S, Toledo-Espiett LA, Munir WM (2022) The detection of keratoconus using novel metrics derived by anterior segment optical coherence tomography. Int Ophthalmol. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10792-021-02210-4
Yousefi S, Yousefi E, Takahashi H et al (2018) Keratoconus severity identification using unsupervised machine learning. PLoS ONE 13:e0205998. https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0205998
Kamiya K, Ayatsuka Y, Kato Y et al (2019) Keratoconus detection using deep learning of colour-coded maps with anterior segment optical coherence tomography: a diagnostic accuracy study. BMJ Open 9:31313. https://doi.org/10.1136/BMJOPEN-2019-031313
Kato N, Masumoto H, Tanabe M et al (2021) Predicting keratoconus progression and need for corneal crosslinking using deep learning. J Clin Med 10:1–9. https://doi.org/10.3390/JCM10040844
Shi C, Wang M, Zhu T et al (2020) Machine learning helps improve diagnostic ability of subclinical keratoconus using Scheimpflug and OCT imaging modalities. Eye Vis 7:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/S40662-020-00213-3/TABLES/5
Funding
This research was funded in part by the Program for Research Initiated by Students and Mentors (PRISM), University of Maryland School of Medicine Office of Student Research.
This work was also supported by the University of Maryland, Baltimore, Institute for Clinical & Translational Research (ICTR) and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) Clinical Translational Science Award (CTSA) Grant No. IUL1TR003098. Dr. Alexander received funding support from Grant KL2TR003099 and K23EY032525.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed to the study concept and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by Anna Lin. Anna Lin prepared Figs. 1, 2 and all tables. Libby Wei prepared supplemental Figs. 1–4. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Anna Lin and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose. All co-authors have seen and agree with the contents of the manuscript.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Lin, A.N., Mohammed, I.S.K., Munir, W.M. et al. Repeatability and reliability of semi-automated anterior segment-optical coherence tomography imaging compared to manual analysis in normal and keratoconus eyes. Int Ophthalmol 43, 5063–5069 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-023-02909-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-023-02909-6