Artificial Intelligence and Diabetic Retinopathy: AI Framework, Prospective Studies, Head-to-head Validation, and Cost-effectiveness

A pilot cost-analysis study comparing AI-based EyeArt® and ophthalmologist assessment of diabetic retinopathy in minority women in Oslo, Norway

BACKGROUND

Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is the leading cause of adult blindness in the working age population worldwide, which can be prevented by early detection. Regular eye examinations are recommended and crucial for detecting sight-threatening DR. Use of artificial intelligence (AI) to lessen the burden on the healthcare system is needed.

PURPOSE

To perform a pilot cost-analysis study for detecting DR in a cohort of minority women with DM in Oslo, Norway, that have the highest prevalence of diabetes mellitus (DM) in the country, using both manual (ophthalmologist) and autonomous (AI) grading. This is the first study in Norway, as far as we know, that uses AI in DR- grading of retinal images.

METHODS

On Minority Women's Day, November 1, 2017, in Oslo, Norway, 33 patients (66 eyes) over 18 years of age diagnosed with DM (T1D and T2D) were screened. The Eidon - True Color Confocal Scanner (CenterVue, United States) was used for retinal imaging and graded for DR after screening had been completed, by an ophthalmologist and automatically, using EyeArt Automated DR Detection System, version 2.1.0 (EyeArt, EyeNuk, CA, USA). The gradings were based on the International Clinical Diabetic Retinopathy (ICDR) severity scale [1] detecting the presence or absence of referable DR. Cost-minimization analyses were performed for both grading methods.

RESULTS

33 women (64 eyes) were eligible for the analysis. A very good inter-rater agreement was found: 0.98 (P < 0.01), between the human and AI-based EyeArt grading system for detecting DR. The prevalence of DR was 18.6% (95% CI: 11.4-25.8%), and the sensitivity and specificity were 100% (95% CI: 100-100% and 95% CI: 100-100%), respectively. The cost difference for AI screening compared to human screening was $143 lower per patient (cost-saving) in favour of AI.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that The EyeArt AI system is both a reliable, cost-saving, and useful tool for DR grading in clinical practice.

A Review of Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Formulas Based on Artificial Intelligence

PURPOSE

The proper selection of an intraocular lens power calculation formula is an essential aspect of cataract surgery. This study evaluated the accuracy of artificial intelligence-based formulas.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

This review comprises articles evaluating the exactness of artificial intelligence-based formulas published from 2017 to July 2023. The papers were identified by a literature search of various databases (Pubmed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Crossref, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and SciELO) using the terms "IOL formulas", "FullMonte", "Ladas", "Hill-RBF", "PEARL-DGS", "Kane", "Karmona", "Hoffer QST", and "Nallasamy". In total, 25 peer-reviewed articles in English with the maximum sample and the largest number of compared formulas were examined.

RESULTS

The scores of the mean absolute error and percentage of patients within ±0.5 D and ±1.0 D were used to estimate the exactness of the formulas. In most studies the Kane formula obtained the smallest mean absolute error and the highest percentage of patients within ±0.5 D and ±1.0 D. Second place was typically achieved by the PEARL DGS formula. The limitations of the studies were also discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

Kane seems to be the most accurate artificial intelligence-based formula. PEARL DGS also gives very good results. Hoffer QST, Karmona, and Nallasamy are the newest, and need further evaluation.