Developing new automated matched alternation flicker using optic disc photography for the detection of glaucoma progression
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 안재홍 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 이마빈 | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2019-10-21T07:31:54Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2019-10-21T07:31:54Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2018-08 | - |
dc.identifier.other | 27940 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | https://dspace.ajou.ac.kr/handle/2018.oak/19216 | - |
dc.description | 학위논문(박사)--아주대학교 일반대학원 :의학과,2018. 8 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 목적 : 녹내장 환자에서 새롭게 개발된 AMAF ( automatic matched matched flicker)의 진행 탐지 알고리즘을 평가하고자 한다. 방법 : 시야 검사에서 평균 편위값(Mean deviation) 이 -6 dB보다 큰 103명의 개방각 녹내장 환자를 대상으로 후향적 연구를 진행하였다. 기능적 진행은 시야검사에 의해 판별되는 두가지의 진행기준을 근거로 판단되었으며, 구조적인 진행은 시신경 유두 및 망막 신경 섬유층 (RNFL) 촬영을 사용하여 기존의 병렬비교법과 AMAF를 통한 판단법을 이용하였다. AMAF와 기존의 병렬비교법의 녹내장 진행 판별능력의 비교는 기능적 및 구조적 진행 판독 결과간의 일치도에 의해 평가되었다. 빛간섭 단층촬영 (OCT, optical coherence tomography) 을 통해 측정된 RNFL 두께 변화가 상기의 각각의 판독법을 통해 진행 또는 비진행으로 판독된 안구에서 어떤 차이를 보이는지도 비교하였다. 상기 연구에 포함되지 않았던 45쌍의 정상안압녹내장 환자의 안저사진을 이용해 일치도 연구를 진행하였다. 병렬 비교 이미지 그리고 AMAF로 만들어진 교대 깜빡임 이미지를 두명의 녹내장 전문의와 두명의 일반 안과의사가 판독하였다. 검사자내 그리고 검사자간 일치도를 카파상수와 Bland and Altman plot을 이용해 분석하였다. 결과 : 103안중 47 (45.6%), 21 (20.4%), 그리고 32 (31.1%)안이 각각 AMAF, 기존의 병렬비교법 그리고 시야검사를 이용한 guided progression analysis (GPA) 를 통해 녹내장이 진행된 것으로 판독되었다. AMAF 는 기존에 병렬비교법에 비해 시야검사의 GPA 와 일치도가 더 우수한 것으로 나타났다. (k = 0.337; P < 0.001 and k = 0.124; P = 0.191, respectively). OCT를 통해 측정된 시신경섬유층 두께의 변화는 AMAF를 통해서 진행된 녹내장으로 판명된 환자군에서 진행이 없는 것으로 판명된 환자군에 비해 유의하게 컸던 반면 (-3.49 ± 2.86 um/year vs. -1.83 ± 3.22 um/year; P = 0.007) 병렬비교법에서는 그렇지 못했다. (-3.24 ± 2.42 um/year vs. -2.42 ± 3.33 um/year; P = 0.290). 검사자간 일치도 비교 연구에서, 녹내장 전문의는 AMAF를 통해서 (average, 40%) 기존의 병렬비교법에 비해 (average, 23.3%) 더 많은 녹내장 진행을 판독해 내었다. 일반 안과의사 역시 AMAF를 이용해 (average, 28.9%) 기존의 병렬비교법보다 (average, 18.9%) 더 많은 녹내장을 판독해 내었다. AMAF 는 평균이상에서 상당한 정도의 (fair to substantial) 검사자간 일치도를 (k = 0.530~0.645) 평균에서 완벽한 검사자내 일치도 (k = 0.503~0.955) 를 보였다. AMAF를 이용한 녹내장 진행의 판독에 있어서 검사자간 그리고 검사자내 일치도는 녹내장 전문의가 일반 안과의사에 비해 우수하였다. 결론 : AMAF는 녹내장의 구조적 진행을 발견해 내는데 있어서 기존의 병렬비교법에 비해 더 우수한 것으로 확인되었으며 시야검사를 통한 기능적 진행검사와도 중등도의 일치도를 보였다. 또한 녹내장 전문의가 이용하였을 때 우수한 검사자간 검사자내 일치도를 보여서 녹내장 환자의 진행 관찰에 도움이 될 수 있을 것으로 사료된다. | - |
dc.description.tableofcontents | Table of Contents ABSTRACT·················································································i TABLE OF CONTENTS·································································iv LIST OF FIGURES ·······································································v LIST OF TABLES ········································································v I. INTRODUCTION ······································································1 II. MATERIALS AND METHODS ····················································3 A. Selection of patients ·································································3 B. Creating the application ·····························································4 C. Making flicker images and the determination of progression··················6 D. Evaluation of agreement of AMAF for detection of glaucomatous structural change··········8 E. Statistical analysis ··································································10 III. RESULTS ·············································································10 IV.DISCUSSION ·········································································15 V. CONCLUSION········································································23 REFERENCE··············································································24 국문요약 ·················································································27 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. The appearance of the application···········································29 Figure 2. The example of screen view of automated matched alternating flicker and classical side-by-side comparison. ········································30 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Descriptive statistics of enrolled subjects (means ± SD) ·················31 Table 2. Agreement between image analysis methods and VF criteria to detect glaucoma progression ····································································32 Table 3. Agreement between matched flicker and conventional comparison method to detect changes of fundus photography ························33 Table 4. Comparison of retinal nerve fiber layer decay between progressing and stable eyes according to the progression criteria. ····························34 Table 5. Summary of Grading of glaucomatous progression by Glaucoma experts (A, B) and general ophthalmologist(C, D) using with automated matched alternating flicker(AMAF) and side-by-side parallel comparison. ······35 Table 6. Intra-reader and inter-reader agreement for evaluation of glaucomatous fundus changes with automated matched alternating flicker (AMAF) and side-by-side parallel comparison. ································································36 Table 7. Intra-instrument agreement for evaluation of glaucomatous fundus changes with automated matched alternating flicker (AMAF) and side-by-side parallel comparion. ·······································································37 | - |
dc.language.iso | eng | - |
dc.publisher | The Graduate School, Ajou University | - |
dc.rights | 아주대학교 논문은 저작권에 의해 보호받습니다. | - |
dc.title | Developing new automated matched alternation flicker using optic disc photography for the detection of glaucoma progression | - |
dc.title.alternative | Marvin Lee | - |
dc.type | Thesis | - |
dc.contributor.affiliation | 아주대학교 일반대학원 | - |
dc.contributor.alternativeName | Marvin Lee | - |
dc.contributor.department | 일반대학원 의학과 | - |
dc.date.awarded | 2018. 8 | - |
dc.description.degree | Master | - |
dc.identifier.localId | 887680 | - |
dc.identifier.uci | I804:41038-000000027940 | - |
dc.identifier.url | http://dcoll.ajou.ac.kr:9080/dcollection/common/orgView/000000027940 | - |
dc.subject.keyword | Automated matched alternation flicker | - |
dc.subject.keyword | Fundus photography | - |
dc.subject.keyword | Progression of glaucoma | - |
dc.description.alternativeAbstract | Purpose: To evaluate a progression-detecting algorithm for a new automated matched alternation flicker (AMAF) in glaucoma patients. Methods: Open-angle glaucoma patients with a baseline mean deviation of visual field (VF) test > -6 dB were included in this longitudinal and retrospective study. Functional progression was detected by two VF progression criteria and structural progression by both AMAF and conventional comparison methods using optic disc and retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) photography. Progression-detecting performances of AMAF and the conventional method were evaluated by agreement between functional and structural progression criteria. RNFL thickness changes measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT) were compared between progressing and stable eyes determined by each method. Forty-five pairs of fundus photographs of normal tension glaucoma patients were collected. Fundus photographs were taken at intervals of more than 12 months. Alternating flicker images were created using a new AMAF application. In a blinded manner, two glaucoma experts and two general ophthalmologists compared the presence of glaucomatous structural changes using either the AMAF method or the side-by-side comparison method. The interobserver and intraobserver agreements were compared using the Bland and Altman plot analysis. Results: Among 103 eyes, 47 (45.6%), 21 (20.4%), and 32 (31.1%) eyes were evaluated as glaucoma progression using AMAF, the conventional method, and guided progression analysis (GPA) of the VF test, respectively. The AMAF showed better agreement than the conventional method, using GPA of the VF test (k = 0.337; P < 0.001 and k = 0.124; P = 0.191, respectively). The rates of RNFL thickness decay using OCT were significantly different between the progressing and stable eyes when progression was determined by AMAF (-3.49 ± 2.86 um/year vs. -1.83 ± 3.22 um/year; P = 0.007) but not by the conventional method (-3.24 ± 2.42 um/year vs. -2.42 ± 3.33 um/year; P = 0.290). In inter-reader agreement analysis, The glaucoma experts detected more glaucoma progression using the AMAF method (average, 40%) compared with the side-by-side method (average, 23.3%). General ophthalmologists detected more glaucomatous progression with the AMAF method (average, 28.9%) than with the side-by-side method (average, 18.9%). The AMAF method showed fair to substantial interreader agreement (k = 0.530~0.645) and fair to perfect intrareader agreement (k = 0.503~0.955). Interreader and intrareader agreement using the AMAF method was better for the glaucoma experts compared with the general ophthalmologists. Conclusions: The AMAF was better than the conventional comparison method in discriminating structural changes during glaucoma progression, and showed a moderate agreement with functional progression criteria. Regarding inter- and intrareader agreement, agreement for the glaucoma experts was best using the AMAF method. | - |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.