Cargando…
HIOP-Reader: Automated Data Extraction for the Analysis of Manually Recorded Nycthemeral IOPs and Glaucoma Progression
PURPOSE: Nycthemeral (24-hour) intraocular pressure (IOP) monitoring in glaucoma has been used in Europe for more than 100 years to detect peaks missed during regular office hours. Data supporting this practice are lacking, because it is difficult to correlate manually drawn IOP curves to objective...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9233288/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35737376 http://dx.doi.org/10.1167/tvst.11.6.22 |
Sumario: | PURPOSE: Nycthemeral (24-hour) intraocular pressure (IOP) monitoring in glaucoma has been used in Europe for more than 100 years to detect peaks missed during regular office hours. Data supporting this practice are lacking, because it is difficult to correlate manually drawn IOP curves to objective glaucoma progression. To address this, we developed an automated IOP data extraction tool, HIOP-Reader. METHODS: Machine learning image analysis software extracted IOP data from hand-drawn, nycthemeral IOP curves of 225 retrospectively identified patients with glaucoma. The relationship between demographic parameters, IOP, and mean ocular perfusion pressure (MOPP) data to spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SDOCT) data was analyzed. Sensitivities and specificities for the historical cutoff values of 15 mm Hg and 22 mm Hg in detecting glaucoma progression were calculated. RESULTS: Machine data extraction was 119 times faster than manual data extraction. The IOP average was 15.2 ± 4.0 mm Hg, nycthemeral IOP variation was 6.9 ± 4.2 mm Hg, and MOPP was 59.1 ± 8.9 mm Hg. Peak IOP occurred at 10 am and trough at 9 pm. Progression occurred mainly in the temporal-superior and temporal-inferior SDOCT sectors. No correlation could be established between demographic, IOP, or MOPP variables and disease progression on OCT. The sensitivity and specificity of both cutoff points (15 and 22 mm Hg) were insufficient to be clinically useful. Outpatient IOPs were noninferior to nycthemeral IOPs. CONCLUSIONS: IOP data obtained during a single visit make for a poor diagnostic tool, no matter whether obtained using nycthemeral measurements or during outpatient hours. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: HIOP-Reader rapidly extracts manually recorded IOP data to allow critical analysis of existing databases. |
---|