May 2003
Volume 44, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2003
A Comparison of Two Digital Image Capture Cameras with Slit-lamp Bio-microscopy in the Grading of Diabetic Retinopathy
S.J. Morgan; J. Lusty; S. Hatcher; L. Beck; D. Owens
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • S.J. Morgan
    Department of Ophthalmology, Royal Glamorgan Hospital, Cardiff, United Kingdom
  • J. Lusty
    Department of Medical Illustration, Llandough Hospital, Cardiff, United Kingdom
  • S. Hatcher
    Department of Academic Medicine, University of Wales College of Medicine, Cardiff, United Kingdom
  • L. Beck
    Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, United Kingdom
  • D. Owens
    Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, United Kingdom
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  S.J. Morgan, None; J. Lusty, None; S. Hatcher, None; L. Beck, None; D. Owens, None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2003, Vol.44, 4030. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      User Alerts
      You are adding an alert for:
      A Comparison of Two Digital Image Capture Cameras with Slit-lamp Bio-microscopy in the Grading of Diabetic Retinopathy
      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

      S.J. Morgan, J. Lusty, S. Hatcher, L. Beck, D. Owens; A Comparison of Two Digital Image Capture Cameras with Slit-lamp Bio-microscopy in the Grading of Diabetic Retinopathy . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2003;44(13):4030.

      Download citation file:

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

      ×
    • Get Permissions
  • Supplements
Abstract

Abstract: : Purpose: To compare in a clinic environment the effect of digital image capture camera resolution upon the grading of diabetic retinopathy. Methods: 50 Eyes from 25 diabetic patients were photographed using two digital camera systems mounted on a Canon CR6-45NMf Retinal Camera. The cameras used were the Sony DXC-950P Video Camera (752 x 582 pixels, 1.3Mb file size) and the Canon D30 Digital Camera (2160 x 1440 pixels, 9Mb file size). Mydriatic fundus photography comprised of two 45 degree fields (one macular centred and one nasal to disc) was obtained for each eye and the images stored in their uncompressed format. These images were then graded using the Bro Taf Diabetic Retinopathy Screening Service criteria. Each patient also underwent dilated indirect fundoscopy for independent grading by a single Ophthalmologist within one week of photography. The grading results from the two cameras and slit-lamp bio-microscopy were then compared. Results: Slit-lamp bio-microscopy grading agreed with the Canon D30 digital camera image grading in 36% of eyes compared to 46% agreement with the Sony 950 Video Camera. The ophthalmologist grading of the retinopathy was higher (more clinically advanced) in 46% and 40% of eyes compared to the Canon D30 and Sony 950 images respectively. The slit-lamp bio-microscopy graded the retinopathy as less severe in 18% of eyes compared to the Canon D30 and 14% of eyes compared to the Sony 950. Further statistical analysis will be presented. Conclusions: The availability of higher resolution images of diabetic retinopathy did not increase the agreement between the gradings from the digital image capture cameras studied, and slit-lamp bio-microscopy. This has implications for the imaging standards to be used in future community based diabetic retinopathy screening programs.

Keywords: diabetic retinopathy • imaging/image analysis: clinical • clinical (human) or epidemiologic studies: sys 
© 2003, 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 © 2015 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