June 2013
Volume 54, Issue 15
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2013
Comparison of Fixation Stability Measured by Laser Scanning Digital Camera and DLP-Cam
Benno Petrig; Jeff Clendenon; Lisa Ensman; Matthew Muller; Ann Elsner; Glen Ozawa; Taras Litvin; Jorge Cuadros; Tuhin Roy; Danny Li
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Benno Petrig
    School of Optometry, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN
    Aeon Imaging LLC, Bloomington, IN
  • Jeff Clendenon
    Aeon Imaging LLC, Bloomington, IN
  • Lisa Ensman
    School of Optometry, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN
  • Matthew Muller
    Aeon Imaging LLC, Bloomington, IN
  • Ann Elsner
    School of Optometry, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN
  • Glen Ozawa
    School of Optometry, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA
  • Taras Litvin
    School of Optometry, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA
  • Jorge Cuadros
    School of Optometry, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA
  • Tuhin Roy
    School of Optometry, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA
  • Danny Li
    School of Optometry, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships Benno Petrig, Aeon Imaging LLC (E), Aeon Imaging LLC (P); Jeff Clendenon, Aeon Imaging, LLC (E); Lisa Ensman, None; Matthew Muller, Aeon Imaging, LLC (I), Aeon Imaging, LLC (P), Aeon Imaging, LLC (R), Aeon Imaging, LLC (S), Indiana University Research and Technology Corporation (P); Ann Elsner, Aeon Imaging, LLC (I), Aeon Imaging, LLC (F), Aeon Imaging, LLC (P); Glen Ozawa, None; Taras Litvin, None; Jorge Cuadros, EyePACS LLC (I); Tuhin Roy, None; Danny Li, None
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2013, Vol.54, 2773. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      User Alerts
      You are adding an alert for:
      Comparison of Fixation Stability Measured by Laser Scanning Digital Camera and DLP-Cam
      You will receive an email whenever this article is corrected, updated, or cited in the literature. You can manage this and all other alerts in My Account
      The alert will be sent to:
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation
      Citation

      Benno Petrig, Jeff Clendenon, Lisa Ensman, Matthew Muller, Ann Elsner, Glen Ozawa, Taras Litvin, Jorge Cuadros, Tuhin Roy, Danny Li; Comparison of Fixation Stability Measured by Laser Scanning Digital Camera and DLP-Cam. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2013;54(15):2773.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
    • Get Permissions
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: To compare fixation stability in diabetic patients measured by the laser scanning digital camera (LSDC) and the digital light projector camera (DLP-Cam), using standard deviation of Euclidean distance (ED) and bivariate contour ellipse area (BCEA) as metrics.

Methods: Eight diabetic patients (5 male, 3 females, age 48±12 yr) were imaged at the Eastmont Wellness Center, a diabetic retinopathy screening site within the EyePACS telemedicine network, with both the LSDC and the DLP-Cam. LSDC and DLP-Cam have 36 and 33 deg fields, respectively. Light levels at the cornea were 2 mW @ 850 nm, which appeared quite dim, for the LSDC and 42 uW from the green LED, which was bright, for the DLP-Cam. Image buffers of 20 @ 11 fps (LSDC) and 16 @ 17 fps (DLPC) frames were acquired on the same day by the same camera operator. One eye was chosen at random for this analysis. Fixation stability was assessed using the coordinates determined for image registration by the same alignment algorithm. The measurements in pixels were converted to minArc before comparing the LSDC and DLPC results by paired t-tests.

Results: The standard deviation of ED for this group of patients was 5.09±3.42 and 5.69±3.25 minArc for LSDC and DLP-Cam, respectively. The BCEA, which typically decreases the effect of outliers, was 2.43±0.41 and 2.43±0.44 log(minArc^2), for LSDC and DLP-Cam, respectively. The differences in fixation stability were not statistically significant by either metric.

Conclusions: Both imaging systems provide comparable fixation stability measures, suggesting that the brighter fundus illumination of the DLP-Cam compared to the LSDC does not affect fixation ability. Our alignment algorithms are able to process images taken with either visible or near infrared fundus illumination which are known to emphasize different retinal structures.

Keywords: 552 imaging methods (CT, FA, ICG, MRI, OCT, RTA, SLO, ultrasound) • 688 retina • 522 eye movements  
© 2013, The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc., all rights reserved. Permission to republish any abstract or part of an abstract in any form must be obtained in writing from the ARVO Office prior to publication.
Copyright © 2025 Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology.
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our privacy policy.Accept