Impact of manual correction over automated segmentation of spectral domain optical coherence tomography
Open Access
- 14 February 2020
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in International Journal of Retina and Vitreous
- Vol. 6 (1), 1-7
- https://doi.org/10.1186/s40942-020-0207-6
Abstract
ObjectiveTo study the automated segmentation of retinal layers using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) and the impact of manual correction over segmentation mistakes.MethodsThis was a retrospective, cross-sectional, comparative study that compared the automated segmentation of macular thickness using Spectralis (TM) OCT technology (Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany) versus manual segmentation in eyes with no macular changes, macular cystoid edema (CME), and choroidal neovascularization (CNV). Automated segmentation of macular thickness was manually corrected by two independent examiners and reanalyzed by them together in case of disagreement.ResultsIn total, 306 eyes of 254 consecutive patients were evaluated. No statistically significant differences were noted between automated and manual macular thickness measurements in patients with normal maculas, while a statistically significant difference was found in central thickness in patients with CNV and with CME. Segmentation mistakes in macular OCTs were present in 5.3% (5 of 95) in the normal macula group, 16.4% (23 of 140) in the CME group, and 66.2% (47 of 71) in CNV group. The difference between automated and manual macular thickness was higher than 10% in 1.4% (2 of 140) in the CME group and in 28.17% (20 of 71) in the CNV group. Only one case in the normal group had a higher than 10% segmentation error (1 of 95).ConclusionThe evaluation of automated segmented OCT images revealed appropriate delimitation of macular thickness in patients with no macular changes or with CME, since the frequency and magnitude of the segmentation mistakes had low impact over clinical evaluation of the images. Conversely, automated macular thickness segmentation in patients with CNV showed a high frequency and magnitude of mistakes, with potential impact on clinical analysis.This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- OVERCOMING SEGMENTATION ERRORS IN MEASUREMENTS OF MACULAR THICKNESS MADE BY SPECTRAL-DOMAIN OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHYRetina, 2012
- The effect of software upgrade on optical coherence tomography measurement of the retinal nerve fiber layer thicknessMiddle East African Journal of Ophthalmology, 2012
- Ranibizumab and Bevacizumab for Neovascular Age-Related Macular DegenerationThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2011
- Comparison of retinal thickness values and segmentation performance of different OCT devices in acute branch retinal vein occlusionEye, 2011
- Randomized Trial Evaluating Ranibizumab Plus Prompt or Deferred Laser or Triamcinolone Plus Prompt Laser for Diabetic Macular EdemaOphthalmology, 2010
- ARTIFACTS IN AUTOMATIC RETINAL SEGMENTATION USING DIFFERENT OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY INSTRUMENTSRetina, 2010
- QUALITY ISSUES IN INTERPRETATION OF OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAMS IN MACULAR DISEASESRetina, 2009
- Comparison of time domain Stratus OCT and spectral domain SLO/OCT for assessment of macular thickness and volumeEye, 2008
- Evaluation of image artifact produced by optical coherence tomography of retinal pathologyAmerican Journal of Ophthalmology, 2005
- Optical Coherence Tomography of the Human RetinaAmerican Journal of Ophthalmology, 1995