Paper detail

AI-based Clinical Assessment of Optic Nerve Head Robustness Superseding Biomechanical Testing

$\mathbf{Purpose}$: To use artificial intelligence (AI) to: (1) exploit biomechanical knowledge of the optic nerve head (ONH) from a relatively large population; (2) assess ONH robustness from a single optical coherence tomography (OCT) scan of the ONH; (3) identify what critical three-dimensional (3D) structural features make a given ONH robust. $\mathbf{Design}$: Retrospective cross-sectional study. $\mathbf{Methods}$: 316 subjects had their ONHs imaged with OCT before and after acute intraocular pressure (IOP) elevation through ophthalmo-dynamometry. IOP-induced lamina-cribrosa deformations were then mapped in 3D and used to classify ONHs. Those with LC deformations superior to 4% were considered fragile, while those with deformations inferior to 4% robust. Learning from these data, we compared three AI algorithms to predict ONH robustness strictly from a baseline (undeformed) OCT volume: (1) a random forest classifier; (2) an autoencoder; and (3) a dynamic graph CNN (DGCNN). The latter algorithm also allowed us to identify what critical 3D structural features make a given ONH robust. $\mathbf{Results}$: All 3 methods were able to predict ONH robustness from 3D structural information alone and without the need to perform biomechanical testing. The DGCNN (area under the receiver operating curve [AUC]: 0.76 $\pm$ 0.08) outperformed the autoencoder (AUC: 0.70 $\pm$ 0.07) and the random forest classifier (AUC: 0.69 $\pm$ 0.05). Interestingly, to assess ONH robustness, the DGCNN mainly used information from the scleral canal and the LC insertion sites. $\mathbf{Conclusions}$: We propose an AI-driven approach that can assess the robustness of a given ONH solely from a single OCT scan of the ONH, and without the need to perform biomechanical testing. Longitudinal studies should establish whether ONH robustness could help us identify fast visual field loss progressors.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access7 authors3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.