OCT-based Visual Field Estimation Using Segmentation-free 3D CNN Shows Lower Variability than Subjective Standard Automated Perimetry

Makoto Koyama,Satoru Inoda,Yuta Ueno,Yoshikazu Ito,Tetsuro Oshika,Masaki Tanito
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.17.24312150
2024-08-19
Abstract:Purpose: To train and evaluate a segmentation-free 3D convolutional neural network (3DCNN) model for estimating visual field (VF) from optical coherence tomography (OCT) images and to compare the residual variability of OCT-based estimated VF (OCT-VF) with that of Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) measurements in a diverse clinical population. Design: Retrospective cross-sectional study. Participants: 5,351 patients (9,564 eyes) who underwent macular OCT imaging and Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) tests (24-2 or 10-2 test patterns) at a university hospital from 2006 to 2023. The dataset included 47,653 paired OCT-VF data points, including various ocular conditions. Methods: We trained a segmentation-free 3DCNN model based on the EfficientNet3D-b0 architecture on a comprehensive OCT dataset to estimate VF. We evaluated the model's performance using Pearson's correlation coefficient and Bland‒Altman analysis. We assessed residual variability using a jackknife resampling approach and compared OCT-VF and HFA datasets using generalized estimating equations (GEE), adjusting the number of VF tests, follow-up duration, age, and clustering by eye and patient. Main Outcome Measures: Correlations between estimated and measured VF thresholds and mean deviations (MDs), and residual variability of OCT-VF and HFA. Results: We observed strong correlations between the estimated and measured VF parameters (Pearson's r: 24-2 thresholds 0.893, MD 0.932; 10-2 thresholds 0.902, MD 0.945; all p < 0.001). Bland‒Altman analysis showed good agreement between the estimated and measured MD, with a slight proportional bias. GEE analysis demonstrated significantly lower residual variability for OCT-VF than for HFA (24-2 thresholds: 1.10 vs. 2.48 dB; 10-2 thresholds: 1.20 vs. 2.48 dB; all p < 0.001, Bonferroni-corrected), with lower variability across all test points, severities, and ages, thus highlighting the robustness of the segmentation-free 3DCNN approach in a heterogeneous clinical sample. Conclusions: A segmentation-free 3DCNN model objectively estimated VF from OCT images with high accuracy and significantly lower residual variability than subjective HFA measurements in a heterogeneous clinical sample, including patients with glaucoma and individuals with other ocular diseases. The improved reliability, lower variability, and objective nature of OCT-VF highlight its value for enhancing VF assessment and monitoring of various ocular conditions, potentially facilitating earlier detection of progression and more efficient disease management.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?