Advertisement

Journal of Medical Systems

, 42:227 | Cite as

An Automated Grading and Diagnosis System for Evaluation of Dry Eye Syndrome

  • Ayşe Bağbaba
  • Baha Şen
  • Dursun Delen
  • Betül Seher Uysal
Image & Signal Processing
  • 78 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Image & Signal Processing

Abstract

This article describes methods used to determine the severity of Dry Eye Syndrome (DES) based on Oxford Grading Schema (OGS) automatically by developing and applying a decider model. The number of dry punctate dots occurred on corneal surface after corneal fluorescein staining can be used as a diagnostic indicator of DES severity according to OGS; however, grading of DES severity exactly by carefully assessing these dots is a rather difficult task for humans. Taking into account that current methods are also subjectively dependent on the perception of the ophtalmologists coupled with the time and resource intensive requirements, enhanced diagnosis techniques would greatly contribute to clinical assessment of DES. Automated grading system proposed in this study utilizes image processing methods in order to provide more objective and reliable diagnostic results for DES. A total of 70 fluorescein-stained cornea images from 20 patients with mild, moderate, or severe DES (labeled by an ophthalmologist in the Keratoconus Center of Yildirim Beyazit University Ataturk Training and Research Hospital) used as the participants for the study. Correlations between the number of dry punctate dots and DES severity levels were determined. When automatically created scores and clinical scores were compared, the following measures were observed: Pearson’s correlation value between the two was 0.981; Lin’s Concordance Correlation Coefficients (CCC) was 0.980; and 95% confidence interval limites were 0.963 and 0.989. The automated DES grade was estimated from the regression fit and accordingly the unknown grade is calculated with the following formula: Gpred = 1.3244 log(Ndots) - 0.0612. The study has shown the viability and the utility of a highly successful automated DES diagnostic system based on OGS, which can be developed by working on the fluorescein-stained cornea images. Proper implemention of a computationally savvy and highly accurate classification system, can assist investigators to perform more objective and faster DES diagnoses in real-world scenerios.

Keywords

Dry eye Oxford grading scale Image processing Fluorescein staining Corneal images 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.” (26,379,996/218, 15.11.2017, Yildirim Beyazit University, Ankara).

References

  1. 1.
    Sullivan, D.A., & Stern, M.E., & Tsubota, K., & Dartt, D.A., & Sullivan, R.M., & Bromberg, B.B., “Lacrimal Gland Tear Film, and Dry Eye Syndromes 3”. (1st ed.), Springer, (Part B), US, 2002.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lemp, M. A., Basic principles and classifications of dry eye disorders, in: The Dry Eye: A comprehensive Guide. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1992.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Acharya, U.R., & Ng, E.Y.K., & Suri, J. S., & Campilho, A., (Eds.), Image Analysis and Modeling in Ophthalmology”, (1st ed.), CRC Press, 294–9, 2014.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Garcia, L.R., Advancing the diagnosis of Dry Eye Syndrome: development of dynamic, automated tear film Break-Up assessment. Thesis (PhD), Universidade Da Coruna, Facultade de Informatica, Departamento de Computacion, 2014.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lin, H., and Yiu, S. C., Dry eye disease: A review of diagnostic approaches and treatments. Saudi Journal of Ophthalmology 28(3):173–181, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Asbell, P., & Lemp, M., Dry Eye Disease: The Clinician's Guide to Diagnosis and Treatment. (1st ed.). TNY, (Chapter 1), 2006.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Foulks, G. H., Lemp, M. A., Vester, J. V., Sutphin, J., Murube, J., and Novack, G. D., The definition and classification of dry eye disease: Report of the Definition and Classification Subcommittee of the International Dry Eye Workshop. The Ocular Surface 5:75–92, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Begley, C. G., Chalmers, R. L., Abetz, L., Venkataraman, K., Mertzanis, P., Caffery, B. A., Snyder, C., Edrington, T., Nelson, D., and Simpson, T., The relationship between habitual patient-reported symptoms and clinical signs among patients with dry eye of varying severity. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 44:4753–4761, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Adatia, F. A., Michaeli-Cohen, A., Naor, J., Caffery, B., and Slomovic, A., Correlation between corneal sensitivity, subjective dry eye symptoms and corneal staining in Sjogren’s syndrome. Can. J. Ophthalmol. 39:767–771, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vitale, S., & Goodman, L. A., & Reed, G. F., & Smith, J. A., Comparison of the NEI-VFQ and OSDI questionnaires in patients with Sjogren’s syndrome-related dry eye, Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 2(44), 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu, Z., and Pflugfelder, S. C., Corneal surface irregularity and the effect of artificial tears in aqueous tear deficiency. Ophthalmology 106(5):939–943, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Goto, E., Yagi, Y., Matsumoto, Y., and Tsubota, K., Impaired functional visual acuity of dry eye patients. Am J. Ophthalmol. 133(2):181–186, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bron, A. J., Diagnosis of dry eye. Survey of Opthalmology, 221–6, 2001.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Goto, T., Zheng, X., Klyce, S. D., Kataoka, H., Uno, T., Karon, M., Tatematsu, Y., Bessyo, T., Tsubota, K., and Obashi, Y., A new method for tear film stability using videokeratography. Am J. Ophthalmol. 135(5):607–612, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gilbard, J. P., Human tear film electrolyte concentrations in health and dry-eye disease. Int. Ophthalmol. Clin. 34(1):27–36, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Murube, J., Tear osmolarity. The Ocular Surface 4(2):62–73, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tomlinson, A., Khanal, S., Ramaesh, K., Diaper, C., and McFadyen, A., Tear film osmolarity: determination of a referent for dry eye diagnosis. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 47(10):4309–4315, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tsubota, K., Fujihara, T., Saito, K., and Takeuchi, T., Conjunctival epithelium expression of HLA-DR in dry eye patients. Ophthalmologica 213(1):16–19, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fenga, C., Aragona, P., Cacciola, A., Spinela, R., Nola, C. D., Ferreri, F., and Rania, L., Melbonian gland dysfunction and ocular discomform in video display terminal workers. Eye 22:91–95, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    García-Resúa, C., Lira, M., and Yebra-Pimentel, E., Evaluacióon superficial en jóvenes universitarios. Rev. Esp. Contact 12:37–41, 2005.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kaštelan, S., Tomić, M., Salopek-Rabatić, J., and Novak, B., Diagnostic Procedures and Management of Dry Eye. Biomed. Res. Int. 2013:1–6, 2013.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tutt, R., Bradley, A., Begley, C., and Thibos, L. N., Optical and visual impact of tear break-up in human eyes. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 41:4117–4123, 2000.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stevenson, W., Chauhan, S., and Dana, R., Dry eye disease: an immunemediated ocular surface disorder. Arch. Ophthalmol. 130(1):90–100, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    DEWS Reports, “Methodologies to diagnose and monitor dry eye disease: report of the Diagnostic Methodology Subcommittee of the International Dry Eye WorkShop pp. 108–52 [online]” http://www.tearfilm.org/dewsreport/pdfs/TOS-0502-DEWS-noAds.pdf
  25. 25.
    Bron, A. J., The Doyne Lecture. Reflections on the tears. Eye (Lond) 11:583–602, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bron, A., Evans, V. E., and Smith, J. A., Grading of corneal and conjunctival staining in the context of other dry eye tests. Cornea 22(7):640–650, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    King-Smith, P. E., Fink, B. A., and Fogt, N., Three interferometric methods for measuring the thickness of layers of the tear film. Optom. Vis. Sci. 76(1):19–32, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Goto, E., Dogru, M., Kojima, T., and Tsubota, K., Computer-synthesis of an interference color chart of human tear lipid layer, by a colorimetric approach. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 44(11):4693–4697, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Remeseiro, B., Ramos, L., Penas, M., Martínez, E., Penedo, M., and Mosquera, A., Colour texture analysis for classifying the tear film lipid layer: a comparative study. International Conference on Digital Image Computing: Techniques and Applications (DICTA):268–273, 2011.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Remeseiro, B., Bolon-Canedo, V., Peteiro-Barral, D., Alonso-Betanzos, A., Guijarro-Berdinas, B., Mosquera, A., Penedo, M. G., and Sáanchez-Maroño, N., A Methodology for Improving Tear Film Lipid Layer Classification. IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics 18(4):1485–1493, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Remeseiro, B., & Mosquera, A., & Gonzalez Penedo, M., CASDES: a computer-aided system to support dry eye diagnosis based on tear film maps, Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics, 1(1), 2015.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rodriguez, J. D., Lane, K. J., Ousler, G. W., Angjeli, E., Smith, L. M., and Abelson, M. B., Automated grading system for evaluation of superficial punctate keratitis associated with dry eye. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 56:2340–2347, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Arslan, A., & Şen, B., & Delen, D., & Uysal, B. S., & Çelebi, F. V., & Çakmak, H. B., “A Computer-Aided Grading System for Clinical Evaluation of Dry Eye Syndrome”, Proceedings of the Global Conference on Healthcare Systems Engineering and Management 2016, Istanbul, Turkey, 2016.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Remeseiro, B., Ramos, L., Barreira, N., Mosquera, A., and Yebra-Pimentel, E., Colour Texture Segmentation of Tear Film Lipid Layer Images. LNCS: Computer Aided Systems Theory, Revised Selected Papers EUROCAST 2013(8112):140–147, 2013.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ramos, L., Barreira, N., Mosquera, A., Penedo, M. G., Yebra-Pimentel, E., and Garcíıa-Resúa, C., Analysis of parameters for the automatic computation of the tear film Break-Up Time test based on CCLRU standards. Comput. Methods Prog. Biomed. 113(3):715–724, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chun, Y. S., Yoon, W. B., Kim, K. G., and Park, I. K., Objective Assessment of Corneal Staining Using Digital Image Analysis. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 55(12):7896–7903, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Acharya, U. R., Tan, J. H., Koh, J. E. W., and Tong, L., Automated Diagnosis of Dry eye using Infrared Thermography Images. Infrared Phys. Technol. 71:263–271, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Remeseiro, B., & Mosquera, A., Penedo, M., & García-Resúa, C., Tear film maps based on the lipid interference patterns, 6th International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence (ICAART), France, 732–9. 2014.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wu, D., Boyer, K. L., Nichols, J. J., and King-Smith, P. E., Texture based prelens tear film segmentation in interferometry images. Mach. Vis. Appl. 21:253–259, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Arslan, A., & Şen, B., & Çelebi, F.Ç., & Sertbaş, S. Automatic segmentation of region of interest for dry eye disease diagnosis system. Signal Processing and Communications Applications Conference, SIU, Zonguldak, 2016.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Mohamed, M. A., Abou-El-Soud, M. A., and Eid, M. M., Iris Detection and Normalization in Image Domain Based on Morphological Features. IJCSI International Journal of Computer Science Issues 11(1):51–59, 2014.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Labati, R. D., and Scotti, F., Noisy iris segmentation with boundary regularization and reflections removal. Image Vis. Comput. 28:270–277, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Gonzales, R. C., & Woods, R. E., & Eddins, S. L., Digital Image Processing Using Matlab. (2n ed.). Gatesmark, (Chapter 9), 2009.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Iverson, J., Kamath, C., and Karypis, G., Evaluation of connected component labeling algorithms for distributed-memory systems. Parallel Comput. 44:53–68, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Altman, D. G., and Bland, J. M., Measurement in medicine: the analysis of method comparison studies. Statistician 32:307–317, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Efron, N., Morgan, P. B., and Katsara, S. S., Validation of grading scales for contact lens complications. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 21:17–29, 2001.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Efron, N., Grading scales for contact lens complications. Ophthalmic Physiol. Opt. 18:182–186, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Rodriguez, J. D., Johnston, P. R., Ousler, G. W., Smith, L. M., and Abelson, M. B., Automated grading system for evaluation of ocular redness associated with dry eye. Journal of Clinical Ophthalmology 7:1–8, 2013.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Yoneda, T., Sumi, T., and Takahashi, A., Automated hyperemia software analysis: reliability and reproducibility in healthy subjects. Jpn. J. Ophthalmol. 56:1–7, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Fieguth, P., and Simpson, T., Automated measurement of bulbar Redness. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 43:340–347, 2002.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Papas, E. B., Key factors in the subjective and objective assessment of conjunctival erythema. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 41:687–691, 2000.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Computer Engineering DepartmentAnkara Yıldırım Beyazıt UniversityAnkaraTurkey
  2. 2.Center for Health Systems Innovation, Spears School of Business, Department of Management Science and Information SystemsOklahoma State UniversityTulsaUSA
  3. 3.Atatürk Education and Research HospitalAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations