Literature DB >> 21670338

Comparison of digital and film grading of diabetic retinopathy severity in the diabetes control and complications trial/epidemiology of diabetes interventions and complications study.

Larry D Hubbard1, Wanjie Sun, Patricia A Cleary, Ronald P Danis, Dean P Hainsworth, Qian Peng, Ruth A Susman, Lloyd Paul Aiello, Matthew D Davis.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare diabetic retinopathy (DR) severity as evaluated by digital and film images in a long-term multicenter study, as the obsolescence of film forced the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications Study (DCCT/EDIC) to transition to digital after 25 years.
METHODS: At 20 clinics from 2007 through 2009, 310 participants with type 1 diabetes with a broad range of DR were imaged, per the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) protocol, with both film and digital cameras. Severity of DR was assessed centrally from film and tonally standardized digital cameras. For retinopathy outcomes with greater than 10% prevalence, we had 85% or greater power to detect an agreement κ of 0.7 or lower from our target of 0.9.
RESULTS: Comparing DR severity, digital vs film yielded a weighted κ of 0.74 for eye level and 0.73 for patient level ("substantial"). Overall, digital grading did not systematically underestimate or overestimate severity (McNemar bias test, P = .14). For major DR outcomes (≥3-step progression on the ETDRS scale and disease presence at ascending thresholds), digital vs film κ values ranged from 0.69 to 0.96 ("substantial" to "nearly perfect"). Agreement was 86% to 99%; sensitivity, 75% to 98%; and specificity, 72% to 99%. Major conclusions were similar with digital vs film gradings (odds reductions with intensive diabetes therapy for proliferative DR at EDIC years 14 to 16: 65.5% digital vs 64.3% film).
CONCLUSION: Digital and film evaluations of DR were comparable for ETDRS severity levels, DCCT/EDIC design outcomes, and major study conclusions, indicating that switching media should not adversely affect ongoing studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21670338     DOI: 10.1001/archophthalmol.2011.136

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0003-9950


  14 in total

1.  Utility of hard exudates for the screening of macular edema.

Authors:  Taras V Litvin; Glen Y Ozawa; George H Bresnick; Jorge A Cuadros; Matthew S Muller; Ann E Elsner; Thomas J Gast
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 1.973

Review 2.  Ultra widefield fundus imaging for diabetic retinopathy.

Authors:  Szilárd Kiss; Thomas L Berenberg
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 4.810

3.  Imaging of diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema.

Authors:  Ronald P Danis; Larry D Hubbard
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 4.810

4.  Methods and reproducibility of grading optimized digital color fundus photographs in the Age-Related Eye Disease Study 2 (AREDS2 Report Number 2).

Authors:  Ronald P Danis; Amitha Domalpally; Emily Y Chew; Traci E Clemons; Jane Armstrong; John Paul SanGiovanni; Frederick L Ferris
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2013-07-08       Impact factor: 4.799

5.  Digital Algorithmic Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scoring System (An American Ophthalmological Society Thesis).

Authors:  Jason S Slakter; Jeffrey W Schneebaum; Sabah A Shah
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  2015

Review 6.  Automated retinal image analysis for diabetic retinopathy in telemedicine.

Authors:  Dawn A Sim; Pearse A Keane; Adnan Tufail; Catherine A Egan; Lloyd Paul Aiello; Paolo S Silva
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 5.430

7.  Imager evaluation of diabetic retinopathy at the time of imaging in a telemedicine program.

Authors:  Jerry D Cavallerano; Paolo S Silva; Ann M Tolson; Taniya Francis; Dorothy Tolls; Bina Patel; Sharon Eagan; Lloyd M Aiello; Lloyd P Aiello
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2012-01-11       Impact factor: 19.112

Review 8.  Telemedicine for detecting diabetic retinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Lili Shi; Huiqun Wu; Jiancheng Dong; Kui Jiang; Xiting Lu; Jian Shi
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-01-06       Impact factor: 4.638

Review 9.  Targeting intensive versus conventional glycaemic control for type 1 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses of randomised clinical trials.

Authors:  Pernille Kähler; Berit Grevstad; Thomas Almdal; Christian Gluud; Jørn Wetterslev; Søren Søgaard Lund; Allan Vaag; Bianca Hemmingsen
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2014-08-19       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  Quality Control Measures over 30 Years in a Multicenter Clinical Study: Results from the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial / Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) Study.

Authors:  Gayle M Lorenzi; Barbara H Braffett; Valerie L Arends; Ronald P Danis; Lisa Diminick; Kandace A Klumpp; Anthony D Morrison; Elsayed Z Soliman; Michael W Steffes; Patricia A Cleary
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-11-03       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.