Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background/aims: To examine the association between artificial intelligence (AI)-driven segmentation of geographic atrophy (GA) on optical coherence tomography (OCT) and visual sensitivity loss quantified by defect-mapping microperimetry, a testing strategy optimised to quantify the spatial extent of deep visual sensitivity losses.
Methods: 50 individuals with GA secondary to age-related macular degeneration underwent defect-mapping microperimetry testing within the central 8° radius region in one eye. GA on OCT was automatically segmented with an AI-based multiclass classification and segmentation model, and GA on fundus autofluorescence (FAF) images was manually annotated. Their extent in the topographically corresponding region sampled on microperimetry was derived, and structure-function relationships were examined based on Spearman correlation coefficients (ρ). The distance of each test location from the OCT-defined and FAF-defined GA margin was also derived and used in prediction models of non-response on defect-mapping microperimetry.
Results: There was a strong correlation between the proportion of locations missed on defect-mapping microperimetry and the corresponding percentage of the central 8° radius region with GA on OCT (ρ=0.85) and FAF (ρ=0.89). Prediction models for non-response at individual test locations using GA derived from OCT and FAF imaging had a sensitivity of 59% and 62% (p=0.310), respectively, at 95% specificity.
Conclusions: AI-driven, automated quantification of GA on OCT showed a strong correlation with the global extent of visual sensitivity loss, comparable with those based on manual annotations on FAF imaging. These findings affirm the expected functional relevance of OCT-derived GA measurements and their clinical utility for monitoring disease progression in those with GA.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjo-2024-326603 | DOI Listing |