Investigating Determinants and Evaluating Deep Learning Training Approaches for Visual Acuity in Foveal Hypoplasia.
BCVA, best-corrected visual acuity
CHS, Chediak–Higashi syndrome
D, diopters
FH, foveal hypoplasia
Foveal hypoplasia
GAN, generative adversarial network
Generative adversarial network
HPS, Hermansky–Pudlak syndrome
LogMAR, logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution
NEI, National Eye Institute
Neural network classifier
Nystagmus
OCT
PAX6, Paired Box 6 gene
SER, spherical equivalent refractive error
WAGR, Wilms tumor-aniridia-genital anomalies-retardation syndrome
Journal
Ophthalmology science
ISSN: 2666-9145
Titre abrégé: Ophthalmol Sci
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9918230896206676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2023
Mar 2023
Historique:
received:
02
06
2022
revised:
30
08
2022
accepted:
19
09
2022
entrez:
7
11
2022
pubmed:
8
11
2022
medline:
8
11
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
To describe the relationships between foveal structure and visual function in a cohort of individuals with foveal hypoplasia (FH) and to estimate FH grade and visual acuity using a deep learning classifier. Retrospective cohort study and experimental study. A total of 201 patients with FH were evaluated at the National Eye Institute from 2004 to 2018. Structural components of foveal OCT scans and corresponding clinical data were analyzed to assess their contributions to visual acuity. To automate FH scoring and visual acuity correlations, we evaluated the following 3 inputs for training a neural network predictor: (1) OCT scans, (2) OCT scans and metadata, and (3) real OCT scans and fake OCT scans created from a generative adversarial network. The relationships between visual acuity outcomes and determinants, such as foveal morphology, nystagmus, and refractive error. The mean subject age was 24.4 years (range, 1-73 years; standard deviation = 18.25 years) at the time of OCT imaging. The mean best-corrected visual acuity (n = 398 eyes) was equivalent to a logarithm of the minimal angle of resolution (LogMAR) value of 0.75 (Snellen 20/115). Spherical equivalent refractive error (SER) ranged from -20.25 diopters (D) to +13.63 D with a median of +0.50 D. The presence of nystagmus and a high-LogMAR value showed a statistically significant relationship ( Nystagmus and foveal anatomy impact visual outcomes in patients with FH, and computational algorithms reliably estimate FH grading and visual acuity.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36339947
doi: 10.1016/j.xops.2022.100225
pii: S2666-9145(22)00114-2
pmc: PMC9634033
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
100225Références
Exp Eye Res. 2020 Apr;193:107958
pubmed: 32032626
J Fr Ophtalmol. 2018 May;41(5):e211-e214
pubmed: 29773314
Ophthalmology. 2018 Dec;125(12):1953-1960
pubmed: 30098354
Ophthalmology. 2008 Apr;115(4):756; author reply 756-7
pubmed: 18387418
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013 Apr 26;54(4):2934-9
pubmed: 23518766
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004 Feb;45(2):385-92
pubmed: 14744876
Arch Ophthalmol. 2002 Nov;120(11):1587-8
pubmed: 12427081
Arch Ophthalmol. 2008 Jul;126(7):907-13
pubmed: 18625935
Eye (Lond). 2009 Aug;23(8):1735-9
pubmed: 19590516
Arch Ophthalmol. 1976 Jan;94(1):48-50
pubmed: 1247409
Ophthalmology. 2014 Jan;121(1):234-245
pubmed: 24148654
Ophthalmology. 2011 Aug;118(8):1653-60
pubmed: 21529956
Ophthalmology. 2007 Aug;114(8):1547-51
pubmed: 17337060
Pediatr Neonatol. 2014 Oct;55(5):341-51
pubmed: 25086850
Am J Ophthalmol Case Rep. 2018 Mar 13;10:244-248
pubmed: 29780943
Eur J Hum Genet. 2014 Mar;22(3):344-9
pubmed: 23942204
Front Genet. 2022 Apr 11;13:864092
pubmed: 35480315
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1986 Dec;27(12):1698-705
pubmed: 3793399
Retina. 1992;12(3):254-60
pubmed: 1410836
Ophthalmology. 2011 May;118(5):882-7
pubmed: 21211844
J AAPOS. 2005 Aug;9(4):369-78
pubmed: 16102489
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2015 Jul;56(8):4537-45
pubmed: 26200492
J AAPOS. 2006 Jun;10(3):237-42
pubmed: 16814177
Optom Vis Sci. 2014 Apr;91(4 Suppl 1):S61-5
pubmed: 24637485
Ophthalmology. 2020 Apr;127(4):492-500
pubmed: 31937464
Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2020 Oct;195:105568
pubmed: 32526536
Prog Retin Eye Res. 2018 Sep;66:49-84
pubmed: 29609042
Eur J Hum Genet. 2014 May;22(5):703-6
pubmed: 24045842
Taiwan J Ophthalmol. 2018 Oct-Dec;8(4):181-188
pubmed: 30637189
Ophthalmology. 2017 Jun;124(6):896-902
pubmed: 28283280
Acta Ophthalmol. 2010 Jun;88(4):439-42
pubmed: 19493249
Ophthalmology. 2017 Mar;124(3):359-373
pubmed: 27986385
Arch Ophthalmol. 2006 Jul;124(7):1048-51
pubmed: 16832032
Ophthalmology. 1984 Jun;91(6):603-12
pubmed: 6462623
Am J Ophthalmol. 2012 Nov;154(5):767-778.e2
pubmed: 22935600
Retina. 2008 Nov-Dec;28(10):1552-3
pubmed: 18997616
Nat Genet. 1996 Jun;13(2):141-2
pubmed: 8640214
Am J Ophthalmol Case Rep. 2021 Dec 07;25:101241
pubmed: 34977425
Arch Ophthalmol. 2008 Oct;126(10):1463-5
pubmed: 18852431
Br J Ophthalmol. 1987 Dec;71(12):926-30
pubmed: 3427001
Cell. 2018 Feb 22;172(5):1122-1131.e9
pubmed: 29474911
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010 Nov;51(11):5952-7
pubmed: 20574029
Prog Retin Eye Res. 2013 Jul;35:63-81
pubmed: 23500068
Ophthalmol Sci. 2021 Nov 16;1(4):100079
pubmed: 36246951
Arch Ophthalmol. 2012 Oct;130(10):1291-300
pubmed: 23044942
Am J Hum Genet. 2013 Dec 5;93(6):1143-50
pubmed: 24290379