Tehran University of Medical Sciences

Science Communicator Platform

Stay connected! Follow us on X network (Twitter):
Share this content! On (X network) By
Differentiating Glaucomatous Optic Neuropathy From Non-Glaucomatous Optic Neuropathies Using Deep Learning Algorithms Publisher Pubmed



Vali M1 ; Mohammadi M2 ; Zarei N2 ; Samadi M2 ; Atapourabarghouei A3 ; Supakontanasan W4 ; Suwan Y4 ; Subramanian PS5 ; Miller NR6 ; Kafieh R7 ; Aghsaei Fard M2
Authors
Show Affiliations
Authors Affiliations
  1. 1. From the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering (M.V.), Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran
  2. 2. Farabi Eye Hospital (M.M., N.Z., M.S.M.A.F.), Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  3. 3. Department of Computer Science (A.A.-A.), Durham University, Durham, United Kingdom
  4. 4. Glaucoma Service (W.S., Y.S.), Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
  5. 5. Departments of Ophthalmology, Neurology, and Neurosurgery (P.S.S.), Sue Anschutz-Rodgers University of Colorado Eye Center, Aurora, CO, United States
  6. 6. Department of Neuro-ophthalmology (N.R.M.), Johns Hopkins Hospital, Wilmer Eye Institute, Baltimore, MD, United States
  7. 7. Department of Engineering (R.K.), Durham University, South Road, Durham, United Kingdom

Source: American Journal of Ophthalmology Published:2023


Abstract

PURPOSE: A deep learning framework to differentiate glaucomatous optic disc changes due to glaucomatous optic neuropathy (GON) from non-glaucomatous optic disc changes due to non-glaucomatous optic neuropathies (NGONs). DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHOD: A deep-learning system was trained, validated, and externally tested to classify optic discs as normal, GON, or NGON, using 2183 digital color fundus photographs. A Single-Center data set of 1822 images (660 images of NGON, 676 images of GON, and 486 images of normal optic discs) was used for training and validation, whereas 361 photographs from 4 different data sets were used for external testing. Our algorithm removed the redundant information from the images using an optic disc segmentation (OD-SEG) network, after which we performed transfer learning with various pre-trained networks. Finally, we calculated sensitivity, specificity, F1-score, and precision to show the performance of the discrimination network in the validation and independent external data set. RESULTS: For classification, the algorithm with the best performance for the Single-Center data set was DenseNet121, with a sensitivity of 95.36%, precision of 95.35%, specificity of 92.19%, and F1 score of 95.40%. For the external validation data, the sensitivity and specificity of our network for differentiating GON from NGON were 85.53% and 89.02%, respectively. The glaucoma specialist who diagnosed those cases in masked fashion had a sensitivity of 71.05% and a specificity of 82.21%. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed algorithm for the differentiation of GON from NGON yields results that have a higher sensitivity than those of a glaucoma specialist, and its application for unseen data thus is extremely promising. © 2023 Elsevier Inc.
Other Related Docs