| Literature DB >> 31238395 |
Srikanta Kumar Padhy1, Brijesh Takkar1, Rohan Chawla1, Atul Kumar1.
Abstract
Use of artificial intelligence in medicine in an evolving technology which holds promise for mass screening and perhaps may even help in establishing an accurate diagnosis. The ability of complex computing is to perform pattern recognition by creating complex relationships based on input data and then comparing it with performance standards is a big step. Diabetic retinopathy is an ever-increasing problem. Early screening and timely treatment of the same can reduce the burden of sight threatening retinopathy. Any tool which can aid in quick screening of this disorder and minimize requirement of trained human resource for the same would probably be a boon for patients and ophthalmologists. In this review we discuss the current status of use of artificial intelligence in diabetic retinopathy and few other common retinal disorders.Entities:
Keywords: Artificial intelligence; IDx-DR; fundus image; screening
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31238395 PMCID: PMC6611318 DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1989_18
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Indian J Ophthalmol ISSN: 0301-4738 Impact factor: 1.848
Flow Chart 1Depiction of how machine learning works?
A list of studies reported for screening of diabetic retinopathy using artificial intelligence devices
| Name of the study | Disease studied | Sensitivity, specificity or percentage accuracy of the study | Total fundus images examined | Type of AI used | Main objective |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wong | DR | Area under the curve were 0.97 and o. 92 for microaneurysms and hemorrhages respectively | 143 images | A three-layer feed forward neural network | Deals with detecting the microaneurysms and hemorrhage. Frangi filter used |
| Imani | DR | Accuracy range from 95.23-95.90% Sensitivity of 75.02-75.24% Specificity of 97.45-97.53% | 60 images | Morphological component analysis (MCA) | Detected the exudation and blood vessel |
| Yazid | DR | 97.8% in sensitivity, 99% in specificity and 83.3% in predictivity for STARE database 90.7% in sensitivity, 99.4% in specificity and 74% in predictivity for the custom database | 30 images | Inverse surface thresholding | Detected both hard and soft exudates |
| Akyol | DR | Percentage accuracy of disc detection ranged from 90-94.38% using different data set | 239 images | Key point detection, texture analysis, and visual dictionary techniques | Detected the optic disc of fundus images |
| Niemeijer | DR | Accuracy in 99.9% cases in finding the disc | 1000 images | Combined k-nearest neighbor (kNN) and cues | fast detection of the optic disc |
| Rajalakshmi | DR | 95.8% (95% CI 92.9-98.7) sensitivity and 80.2% (95% CI 72.6-87.8) specificity for detecting any DR 99.1% (95% CI 95.1-99.9) sensitivity and 80.4% (95% CI 73.9-85.9) specificity in detecting STDR | Retinal images of 296 patients | Eye Art AI DR screening software used | Retinal photography with Remidio ‘Fundus on phone’ (FOP) |
| Eye Nuk study[ | DR | Sensitivity was 91.7% (95% CI: 91.3-92.1%) and specificity was 91.5% (95% CI: 91.2-91.7%) | 40542 images | EyePACS telescreening system | Retinal images taken with traditional desktop fundus cameras |
| Ting | DR | Sensitivity and specificity for RDR was 90.5% (95% CI 87.3-93.0%) and 91.6% (95% CI 91.0-92.2%) For STDR the sensitivity was 100% (95% CI 94.1-100.0%) and the specificity was 91.1% (95% CI 90.7-91.4%) | 494661 retinal images | Deep learning system | Multiple retinal images taken with conventional fundus cameras |
| IRIS[ | DR | Sensitivity of the IRIS algorithm in detecting STDR was 66.4% (95% CI 62.8-69.9) with a false-negative rate of 2% and the specificity was 72.8% (95% CI 72.0-73.5) | 15015 patients | Intelligent Retinal Imaging System (IRIS) | Retinal screening examination and nonmydriatic fundus photography |