Macula Spatial Patterns and their Association with Central Visual Field Progression in Glaucoma using Artificial Intelligence.
Mahmoudinezhad Golnoush, Moghimi Sasan, Pawar Varun, Cheng Jiacheng, Walker Evan, Beheshtaein Siavash, Yong Yu Xuan, Beheshtaein Soroosh, Alam Naimul A, Parupudi V S Raghu
AI Summary
AI identified 11 distinct macular thinning patterns, outperforming global thickness in predicting central visual field progression. This improves individualized glaucoma risk assessment and management.
Abstract
Purpose
To provide spatial patterns of ganglion cell complex thickness and assess their associations with central visual field progression in glaucoma.
Methods
Macular patterns from the ganglion cell complex were determined using an artificial intelligence algorithm termed archetypal analysis (AA). The diagnostic accuracy of spatial patterns for detecting 10-2 central visual field progression in eyes with a minimum of five 10-2 visual field tests was calculated and compared with the mean global ganglion cell complex thickness. Eyes with progression on either of two trend-based methods (significant MD slope <-0.5 dB/year or clustered pointwise linear regression) were classified as 'progressors'.
Results
A total of 4031 macular scans of 1093 eyes (611 patients) were included, with a mean (SD) age of 67.8 (12.7) years. Eleven distinct spatial patterns were identified. While the macular vulnerable zone was preferentially affected in four patterns, most of the less vulnerable zones were preserved. The AA models at baseline achieved AUROC (0.73 [95% CI 0.62-0.84]) and outperformed global ganglion cell complex thickness (0.55 [95% CI 0.46-0.61], P=0.01) for predicting central VF progression in eyes with early disease at baseline. The AA models AUROC (0.70 [95% CI 0.59-0.80]) also outperformed ganglion cell complex thickness (0.55 [95% CI 0.48-0.60], P=0.02) for predicting central VF progression across all severities.
Conclusions
Using unsupervised artificial intelligence, characteristic patterns of macular thinning were identified and associated with central visual field progression. Spatial macular pattern analysis may enhance individualized care and improve risk stratification for those at risk of central VF damage.
Shields Classification
Key Concepts4
The archetypal analysis (AA) models at baseline achieved an AUROC of 0.73 (95% CI 0.62-0.84) for predicting central visual field progression in eyes with early glaucoma at baseline, outperforming global ganglion cell complex thickness (AUROC 0.55 [95% CI 0.46-0.61], P=0.01).
The archetypal analysis (AA) models achieved an AUROC of 0.70 (95% CI 0.59-0.80) for predicting central visual field progression across all severities of glaucoma, outperforming global ganglion cell complex thickness (AUROC 0.55 [95% CI 0.48-0.60], P=0.02).
An artificial intelligence algorithm termed archetypal analysis (AA) identified eleven distinct spatial patterns of ganglion cell complex thickness in 1093 eyes (611 patients) with glaucoma, with a mean (SD) age of 67.8 (12.7) years.
The diagnostic accuracy of spatial patterns from the ganglion cell complex for detecting 10-2 central visual field progression was calculated and compared with the mean global ganglion cell complex thickness in eyes with a minimum of five 10-2 visual field tests, in a study including 4031 macular scans of 1093 eyes (611 patients).
Related Articles5
Comparative Analysis of 24-2C, 24-2, and 10-2 Visual Field Tests for Detecting Mild-Stage Glaucoma With Central Visual field Defects.
Observational StudyMicroperimetry Characteristics of Regions With a Truly Nonresponding Location: Implications for Atrophic Age-Related Macular Degeneration.
Observational StudyValidation of a Wearable Virtual Reality Perimeter for Glaucoma Staging, The NOVA Trial: Novel Virtual Reality Field Assessment.
Clinical TrialEvaluation of the long-term variability of macular OCT/OCTA and visual field parameters.
Observational StudyOptic Disc Microvasculature Reduction and Visual Field Progression in Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma.
Case SeriesIs this article assigned to the wrong chapter(s)? Let us know.