Comparison of manual and artificial intelligence-automated choroidal thickness segmentation of optical coherence tomography imaging in myopic adults

Abstract

BackgroundMyopia affects 1.4 billion individuals worldwide. Notably, there is increasing evidence that choroidal thickness plays an important role in myopia and risk of developing myopia-related conditions. With the advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), choroidal thickness segmentation can now be automated, offering inherent advantages such as better repeatability, reduced grader variability, and less reliance for manpower. Hence, we aimed to evaluate the agreement between AI-automated and manual segmented measurements of subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFCT) using two swept-source optical coherence tomography (OCT) systems.MethodsSubjects aged ≥ 16 years, with myopia of ≥ 0.50 diopters in both eyes, were recruited from the Prospective Myopia Cohort Study in Singapore (PROMYSE). OCT scans were acquired using Triton DRI-OCT and PLEX Elite 9000. OCT images were segmented both automatically with an established SA-Net architecture and manually using a standard technique with adjudication by two independent graders. SFCT was subsequently determined based on the segmentation. The Bland–Altman plot and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were used to evaluate the agreement.ResultsA total of 229 subjects (456 eyes) with mean [± standard deviation (SD)] age of 34.1 (10.4) years were included. The overall SFCT (mean ± SD) based on manual segmentation was 216.9 ± 82.7 µm with Triton DRI-OCT and 239.3 ± 84.3 µm with PLEX Elite 9000. ICC values demonstrated excellent agreement between AI-automated and manual segmented SFCT measurements (PLEX Elite 9000: ICC = 0.937, 95% CI: 0.922 to 0.949, P < 0.001; Triton DRI-OCT: ICC = 0.887, 95% CI: 0.608 to 0.950, P < 0.001). For PLEX Elite 9000, manual segmented measurements were generally thicker when compared to AI-automated segmented measurements, with a fixed bias of 6.3 µm (95% CI: 3.8 to 8.9, P < 0.001) and proportional bias of 0.120 (P < 0.001). On the other hand, manual segmented measurements were comparatively thinner than AI-automated segmented measurements for Triton DRI-OCT, with a fixed bias of − 26.7 µm (95% CI: − 29.7 to − 23.7, P < 0.001) and proportional bias of − 0.090 (P < 0.001).ConclusionWe observed an excellent agreement in choroidal segmentation measurements when comparing manual with AI-automated techniques, using images from two SS-OCT systems. Given its edge over manual segmentation, automated segmentation may potentially emerge as the primary method of choroidal thickness measurement in the future.