Purchase this article with an account.
Varsha Alex, Tahmineh Motevasseli, Jefy Alex Jayamon, Sumit R Singh, Dirk Uwe Bartsch, Lingyun Cheng, Shyamanga Borooah, William R Freeman; Assessing the validity of a cross-platform retinal image segmentation tool in normal and diseased retina. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2021;62(8):2433.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
Retrospective, cross-sectional study, quantitatively and qualitatively comparing automated retinal image segmentation using cross platform OrionTM software to proprietary software on retinal images captured using Heidelberg HRA+OCT
Retinal layer segmentations of normal, intermediate dry AMD and diabetic macular edema eyes were performed using Spectralis® HRA+OCT and automated OCT segmentation software OrionTM. Quantitative comparisons were made between the volumes of Nerve fiber layer (NFL), Ganglion cell layer (GCL), Inner plexiform layer (IPL), Outer plexiform layer (OPL), Inner nuclear layer (INL), Outer nuclear layer (ONL), total inner retinal layer (INLY) and total outer retinal layer (OUTLY). A qualitative comparison of accuracy was made by graders who compared software segmentation to manual segmentation.
In normal eyes, all retinal layer volumes calculated by the two softwares were moderate-strongly correlated (Pearson correlation, r > 0.4) except OUTLY. However, differences were statistically significant except in GCIPL and OUTLY. Qualitative analysis done using Wilcoxon test showed that OrionTM was significantly better than Heidelberg in the segmentation of NFL and INL layers (p =< 0.01). In dry AMD eyes, GCIPL, INL, ONL, INLY, TRV layer volumes were moderate-strongly correlated (r > 0.4) between softwares and their differences were statistically significant except GCIPL. Qualitatively, OrionTM generated significantly better segmentation only for the NFL (p =< 0.05). In eyes with DME, all layer volume values were moderate-strongly correlated (r > 0.4) between softwares and their differences were statistically significant except OPL and OUTLY. Qualitatively, OrionTM was significantly better at segmenting INL and OPL layers (p =< 0.01).
Layer volumes correlated well between OrionTM and Heidelberg softwares but were, in general, significantly different suggesting that they used different retinal landmarks for segmentation. Qualitatively, when comparing to the gold standard of manual segmentation, OrionTM segmented normal and diseased retina more accurately. Findings suggest that the cross-platform OrionTM retinal layer segmentation software can be used reliably to study the retinal layers in normal and diseased eyes.Abbreviations: HB- Heidelberg, OR- Orion, TRV- Total retinal volume, GCIPL – GCL+IPL
This is a 2021 ARVO Annual Meeting abstract.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only