Comparison between Deep-Learning-Based Ultra-Wide-Field Fundus Imaging and True-Colour Confocal Scanning for Diagnosing Glaucoma
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Shin, Younji | - |
dc.contributor.author | Cho, Hyunsoo | - |
dc.contributor.author | Shin, Yong Un | - |
dc.contributor.author | Seong, Mincheol | - |
dc.contributor.author | Choi, Jun Won | - |
dc.contributor.author | Lee, Won June | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-07-19T04:54:59Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2022-07-19T04:54:59Z | - |
dc.date.created | 2022-06-29 | - |
dc.date.issued | 2022-06 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | https://scholarworks.bwise.kr/hanyang/handle/2021.sw.hanyang/170090 | - |
dc.description.abstract | In this retrospective, comparative study, we evaluated and compared the performance of two confocal imaging modalities in detecting glaucoma based on a deep learning (DL) classifier: ultra-wide-field (UWF) fundus imaging and true-colour confocal scanning. A total of 777 eyes, including 273 normal control eyes and 504 glaucomatous eyes, were tested. A convolutional neural network was used for each true-colour confocal scan (Eidon AF (TM), CenterVue, Padova, Italy) and UWF fundus image (Optomap (TM), Optos PLC, Dunfermline, UK) to detect glaucoma. The diagnostic model was trained using 545 training and 232 test images. The presence of glaucoma was determined, and the accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) metrics were assessed for diagnostic power comparison. DL-based UWF fundus imaging achieved an AUC of 0.904 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.861-0.937) and accuracy of 83.62%. In contrast, DL-based true-colour confocal scanning achieved an AUC of 0.868 (95% CI: 0.824-0.912) and accuracy of 81.46%. Both DL-based confocal imaging modalities showed no significant differences in their ability to diagnose glaucoma (p = 0.135) and were comparable to the traditional optical coherence tomography parameter-based methods (all p > 0.005). Therefore, using a DL-based algorithm on true-colour confocal scanning and UWF fundus imaging, we confirmed that both confocal fundus imaging techniques had high value in diagnosing glaucoma. | - |
dc.language | 영어 | - |
dc.language.iso | en | - |
dc.publisher | MDPI | - |
dc.title | Comparison between Deep-Learning-Based Ultra-Wide-Field Fundus Imaging and True-Colour Confocal Scanning for Diagnosing Glaucoma | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | Shin, Yong Un | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | Seong, Mincheol | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | Choi, Jun Won | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | Lee, Won June | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.3390/jcm11113168 | - |
dc.identifier.wosid | 000808600500001 | - |
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitation | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, v.11, no.11, pp.1 - 10 | - |
dc.relation.isPartOf | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE | - |
dc.citation.title | JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE | - |
dc.citation.volume | 11 | - |
dc.citation.number | 11 | - |
dc.citation.startPage | 1 | - |
dc.citation.endPage | 10 | - |
dc.type.rims | ART | - |
dc.type.docType | Article | - |
dc.description.journalClass | 1 | - |
dc.description.isOpenAccess | Y | - |
dc.description.journalRegisteredClass | scie | - |
dc.description.journalRegisteredClass | scopus | - |
dc.relation.journalResearchArea | General & Internal Medicine | - |
dc.relation.journalWebOfScienceCategory | Medicine, General & Internal | - |
dc.subject.keywordPlus | NERVE-FIBER LAYER | - |
dc.subject.keywordPlus | OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY | - |
dc.subject.keywordPlus | DEFECTS | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | deep learning | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | image processing | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | glaucoma | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | diagnostic ability | - |
dc.identifier.url | https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/11/11/3168 | - |
Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
222, Wangsimni-ro, Seongdong-gu, Seoul, 04763, Korea+82-2-2220-1365
COPYRIGHT © 2021 HANYANG UNIVERSITY.
Certain data included herein are derived from the © Web of Science of Clarivate Analytics. All rights reserved.
You may not copy or re-distribute this material in whole or in part without the prior written consent of Clarivate Analytics.