Development and comparison of automated classifiers for glaucoma diagnosis using stratus optical coherence tomography

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 46, Issue 11, 2005, Pages 4121-4129

  Huang, Mei Ling ^a   Chen, Hsin Yi ^b  

^a NATIONAL CHIN YI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Taiwan)

^b CHINA MEDICAL UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; AUTOMATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; IMAGING SYSTEM; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RETINA; VISUAL FIELD; ASIAN; CLASSIFICATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; ETHNOLOGY; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; NERVE FIBER; OPEN ANGLE GLAUCOMA; OPTIC DISK; OPTIC NERVE DISEASE; PATHOLOGY; RETINA GANGLION CELL; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TAIWAN; VISUAL SYSTEM EXAMINATION;

ADULT; ASIAN CONTINENTAL ANCESTRY GROUP; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES, OPHTHALMOLOGICAL; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA, OPEN-ANGLE; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NERVE FIBERS; NEURAL NETWORKS (COMPUTER); OPTIC DISK; OPTIC NERVE DISEASES; RETINAL GANGLION CELLS; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TAIWAN; TOMOGRAPHY, OPTICAL COHERENCE; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 33644673457     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.05-0069     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Read RM, Spaeth GL. The practical clinical appraisal of the optic disc in glaucoma: the natural history of cup progression and some specific disc-field correlations. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol. 1974;78:255-267.
2. Sommer A, Pollack I, Maumenee AE. Optic disc parameters and onset of glaucomatous field loss. I: methods and progressive changes in disc morphology. Arch Ophthalmol. 1979;97:1444-1448.
3. Quigley HA, Addicks EM, Green WR. Optic nerve damage in human glaucoma. III: quantitative correlation of nerve fiber loss and visual field defect in glaucoma, ischemic neuropathy, papilledema, and toxic neuropathy. Arch Ophthalmol. 1982;100:135-146.
4. Caprioli J. Correlation of visual function with optic nerve and nerve fiber layer structure in glaucoma. Surv Ophthalmol. 1989; 33(suppl):319-330.
5. Kamal DS, Viswanathan AC, Garway-Heath DF, et al. Detection of optic disc change with the Heidelberg retina tomograph before confirmed visual field change in ocular hypertensives converting to early glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 1999;83:290-294.
6. Ugurlu S, Hoffman D, Garway-Heath DF, et al. Relationship between structural abnormalities and short-wavelength perimetric defects in eyes at risk of glaucoma. AmJ Ophthalmol. 2000;129: 592-598.
7. Greany MJ, Hoffman DC, Garway-Heath DF, et al. Comparisons of optic nerve imaging methods to distinguish normal eyes from those with glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43:140-145.
8. Varma R, Steinmann WC, Scott IU. Expert agreement in evaluating the optic disc for glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 1992;99:215-221.
9. Tielsch JM, Katz J, Quigley HA, et al. Intraobserver and interobserver agreement in measurement of optic disc characteristics. Ophthalmology. 1988;95:350-356.
10. Zangwill L, Shakiba S, Caprioli J, et al. Agreement between clini-cians and a confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope in estimating cup/disk ratios. Am J Ophthalmol. 1995;119:415-421.
11. Sanchez-Galeana C, Bowd C, Blumenthal EZ, et al. Using optical imaging summary data to detect glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2001; 108:1812-1818.
12. Uchida H, Brigatti L, Caprioli J. Detection of structural damage from glaucoma with confocal laser image analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1996;37:2393-2401.
13. Wollstein G, Garway-Heath DF, Hitchings RA. Identification of early glaucoma cases with the scanning laser ophthalmoscope. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:1557-1563.
14. Choplin NT, Lundy DC, Dreher AW. Differentiating patients with glaucoma from glaucoma suspects and normal subjects by nerve fiber layer assessment with scanning laser polarimetiy. Ophthalmology. 1998; 105:2068-2076.
15. Hoh ST, Greenfield DS, Mistlberger A, et al. Optical coherence tomography and scanning laser polarimetry in normal, ocular hypertensive, and glaucomatous eyes. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;129: 129-135.
16. Cioffi GA, Robin AL, Eastman RD, et al. Confocal laser scanning ophthalmoscope: reproducibility of optic nerve head topographic measurements with the confocal laser scanning ophthalmoscope. Ophthalmology. 1993;100:57-62.
17. Weinreb RN, Shakiba S, Sample PA, et al. Association between quantitative nerve fiber layer measurement and visual field loss in glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 1995;120:732-738.
18. Schuman JS, Hee MR, Puliafito CA, et al. Quantification of nerve fiber layer thickness in normal and glaucomatous eyes using optical coherence tomography. Arch Ophthalmol. 1995;113:586-596.
19. Hoh ST, Ishikawa H, Greenfield DS, et al. Peripapillary nerve fiber layer thickness measurement reproducibility using scanning laser polarimetry. J Glaucoma. 1998;7:712-715.
20. Horn FK, Jonas JB, Martus P, et al. Polarimetric measurement of retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in glaucoma diagnosis. J Glaucoma. 1999;8:353-362.
21. Chen HY, Hung PT, Hung TJ. Optical coherence tomography study on retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in open angle glaucoma (Abstract). Am J Ophthalmol. 2005;139(suppl):S53.
22. Hee MR, Izatt JA, Swanson EA, et al. Optical coherence tomography of the human retina. Arch Ophthalmol. 1995;113:325-332.
23. Schuman JS, Hee MR, Arya AV, et al. Optical coherence tomography: a new tool for glaucoma diagnosis. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 1995;6:89-95.
24. Huang D, Swanson EA, Lin CP, et al. Optical coherence tomography. Science. 1991;254:1178-1181.
25. Gurses-Ozden R, Teng C, Vessani R, et al. Macular and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness measurement reproducibility using optical coherence tomography (OCT-3). J Glaucoma. 2004;13:238-244.
26. Paunescu LA, Schuman JS, Price LL, et al. Reproducibility of nerve fiber thickness, macular thickness, and optic nerve head measurements using Stratus OCT. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45: 1716-1724.
27. Goldbaum MH, Sample PA, Chan K, et al. Comparing machine learning classifiers for diagnosing glaucoma from standard automated perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43:162-169.
28. Bowd C, Chan K, Zangwill LM, et al. Comparing neural networks and linear discriminant functions for glaucoma detection using confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy of the optic disc. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43:3444-3454.
29. Iester M, Jonas JB, Mardin CY, et al. Discrimination analysis models for early detection of glaucomatous optic disc changes. Br J Ophthalmol. 2000;84:464-468.
30. Goldbaum MH, Sample PA, White H, et al. Interpretation of automated perimetry for glaucoma by neural network. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1994;35:3362-3373.
31. Mutlukan, E, Keating, K. Visual field interpretation with a personal computer based neural network. Eye. 1994;8:321-323.
32. Brigatti L, Nouri-Mahdavi K, Weitzman M, et al. Automatic detection of glaucomatous visual field progression with neural networks. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;115:725-728.
33. Brigatti L, Hoffman BA, Caprioli J. Neural networks to identify glaucoma with structural and functional measurements. Am J Ophthalmol. 1996;121:511-521.
34. Henson DB, Spenceley SE, Bull DR. Artificial neural network analysis of noisy visual field data in glaucoma. Artif Intell Med. 1997; 10:99-113.
35. Taguchi G, Rajesh J. The Mahalanobis-Taguchi Strategy: A Pattern Technology System. New York; John Wiley & Sons; 2002.
36. Caprioli J, Park HJ, Ugurlu S, et al. Slope of the peripapillary nerve fiber layer surface in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1998; 39:2321-2328.
37. Schuman JS. Appendix A: physical principles of optical coherence tomography. In: Puliafito CA, Fujimoto JG, eds. Optical Coherence Tomography of Ocular Disease. 2nd ed. Thorofare, NJ: Slack; 2004:677-688.
38. Zafar S, Gürses-Özden R, Makornwattana M, et al. Scanning protocol choice affects optical coherence tomography (OCT-3) measurements. J Glaucoma. 2004;13:142-144.
39. Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Muller KE. Applied Regression Analysis and other Multivariate Methods. 2nd ed. Boston: PSW-Kent; 1998.
40. Mahalanobis PC. On the generalized distance in statistics, proceedings. Natl Inst Sci India. 1936;2:49-55.
41. Poggio T, Shelton CR. Machine learning, machine vision, and the brain. AI Magazine. 1999;20:37-58.
42. Haykin S. Multilayer perceptrons. In: Neural Networks: A Comprehensive Foundation. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1999:156-187.
43. Rumelhart DE, Hinton G, Williams R. Learning representations of back-propagation errors. Nature. 1986;323:533-536.
44. Tomatis S, Bono A, Bartoli C, et al. Automated melanoma detection: multispectral imaging and neural network approach for classification. American Association of Physicists in Medicine. 2003;2:212-221.
45. Goodenough DJ, Rossmann K, Lusted LB. Radiographic applications of receiver operating characteristic ROC curve. Radiology. 1974;110:89-95.
46. Chan K, Lee TW, Sample PA, et al. Comparison of machine learning and traditional classifiers in glaucoma diagnosis. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2002;9:963-974.
47. Medeiros FA, Zangwill LM, Bowd C, et al. Comparison of the GDx VCC scanning laser polarimeter, HRT II confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope, and Stratus OCT optical coherence tomography for the detection of glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122:827-837.
48. Wollstein G, Ishikawa H, Wang J, et al. Comparison of three optical coherence tomography scanning areas for detection of glaucomatous damage. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005;139:39-43.
49. Chen HY, Huang ML. Discrimination between normal and glaucomatous eyes using Stratus optical coherence tomography in Taiwan Chinese subjects. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2005; 243:894-902.
50. Taguchi G, Rajesh J. New trends in multivariate diagnosis. Sankhya. 2000;62:233-248.
51. Su CT, Li TS. A Mahalanobis distance based classifier for diagnosis of diseases. J Chin Inst Ind Eng. 2002;19:41-47.
52. Samek O, Telle HT, Beddows DCS. Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy: a tool for real-time, in vitro and in vivo identification of carious teeth. BMC Oral Health. 2001;1:1-9.
53. Guedes V, Schuman JS, Herzmark E, et al. Optical coherence tomography measurement of macular and nerve fiber layer thickness in normal and glaucomatous human eyes. Ophthalmology. 2003;110:177-189.
54. Kanamori A, Nakamura M, Escano MFT, et al. Evaluation of the glaucomatous damage on retinal nerve fiber layer thickness between normal and glaucomatous eyes using the Heidelberg retina tomography, GDx nerve fiber analyzer, and optical coherence tomography. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003;135:513-520.
55. Williams ZY, Schuman JS, Gamell L, et al. Optical coherence tomography measurement of nerve fiber layer thickness and the likelihood of a visual field defect. Am J Ophthalmol. 2002;134: 538-546.
56. Zangwill LM, Bowd C, Berry CC, et al. Discriminating between normal and glaucomatous eyes using the Heidelberg retina tomography, GDx nerve fiber analyzer, and optical coherence tomography. Arch Ophthalmol. 2001;119:985-993.
57. Garway-Heath DF, Hitchings RA. Sources of bias in studies of optic disc and retinal nerve fiber morphology. Br J Ophthalmol. 1988; 82:986.
58. Jaeschke R, Guyatt G, Lijmer J. Diagnostic Tests. In: Rennie D, ed. Users' Guide to the Medical Literature: Essentials of Evidence-Based Clinical Practice. Chicago: AMA Press; 2002; 187-217.