RESUMEN
Purpose: To assess the accuracy of e?Paarvai, an artificial intelligence?based smartphone application (app) that detects and grades cataracts using images taken with a smartphone by comparing with slit lamp?based diagnoses by trained ophthalmologists. Methods: In this prospective diagnostic study conducted between January and April 2022 at a large tertiary?care eye hospital in South India, two screeners were trained to use the app. Patients aged >40 years and with a best?corrected visual acuity <20/40 were recruited for the study. The app is intended to determine whether the eye has immature cataract, mature cataract, posterior chamber intra?ocular lens, or no cataract. The diagnosis of the app was compared with that of trained ophthalmologists based on slit?lamp examinations, the gold standard, and a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was estimated. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were computed. Results: The two screeners used the app to screen 2,619 eyes of 1,407 patients. In detecting cataracts, the app showed high sensitivity (96%) but low specificity (25%), an overall accuracy of 88%, a PPV of 92.3%, and an NPV of 57.8%. In terms of cataract grading, the accuracy of the app was high in detecting immature cataracts (1,875 eyes, 94.2%), but its accuracy was poor in detecting mature cataracts (73 eyes, 22%), posterior chamber intra?ocular lenses (55 eyes, 29.3%), and clear lenses (2 eyes, 2%). We found that the area under the curve in predicting ophthalmologists’ cataract diagnosis could potentially be improved beyond the app’s diagnosis based on using images only by incorporating information about patient sex and age (P < 0.0001) and best?corrected visual acuity (P < 0.0001). Conclusions: Although there is room for improvement, e?Paarvai app is a promising approach for diagnosing cataracts in difficult?to?reach populations. Integrating this with existing outreach programs can enhance the case detection rate.
RESUMEN
Purpose: To compare the slit?lamp method and wavefront aberrometry method based on outcomes of toric realignment surgeries. Settings: Tertiary care ophthalmic hospital. Design: Retrospective study. Methods: This study included all eyes undergoing toric intraocular lens (TIOL) realignment surgery between January 2019 and December 2021 for which TIOL axis assessment by slit?lamp method and wavefront aberrometry method was available. Data were retrieved from electronic medical records, and we documented demographics, uncorrected visual acuity (UCVA), subjective refraction, and TIOL axis by slit?lamp and wavefront aberrometry methods on postoperative day 1 and day 14. In patients with misalignment, TIOL was realigned to the original position in group 1 (27 patients) and to an axis based on calculations provided by wavefront aberrometer in group 2 (25 patients). Post?realignment surgery, UCVA, subjective refraction, and TIOL axis by slit?lamp and wavefront aberrometry methods were assessed and analyzed. Results: We analyzed 52 eyes and found that the mean preoperative misalignment with the slit?lamp method (44.9° ±20.0°) and wavefront aberrometry (47.1° ±19.5°) was similar. The corresponding degrees of misalignment post?TIOL repositioning surgeries were 5.2° ±5.2° (slit?lamp method) and 4.7° ±5.1° (wavefront aberrometry) (P = 0.615). Both groups showed significant improvement in median log of minimum angle of resolution (logMAR) UCVA and reduction in median refractive cylinder. Conclusions: Slit?lamp method is as good as wavefront aberrometer method to assess TIOL axis. Toric realignment surgery is found to be safe, and realigning TIOL based on either slit?lamp method or wavefront aberrometer method equally improved UCVA and decreased residual refractive cylinder.
RESUMEN
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare and analyze the endothelial cell loss during manual small-incision cataract surgery (MSICS) using the viscoelastic-assisted nucleus removal versus basal salt solution plus technique. Methods: This was a prospective randomized trial of 204 patients who underwent MSICS using viscoelastic-assisted nucleus removal (Group 1- OVD) versus basal salt solution plus technique (Group 2- BSS) at a tertiary eye care hospital in North India from January 2018 to 2021. Of these 204 patients, 103 (50.5%) and 101 (49.5%) were allocated to Group 1 and 2, respectively. The parameters assessed were detailed history, demographics, and anterior and posterior segment details. Visual acuity, intraocular pressure (IOP), keratometry, pachymetry, and endothelial cell density were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively on day 1 and 30. Results: The mean age of the patients was 64.5 � 8.2 years (range 48� years). There were 129 (63.2%) males and 75 (36.8%) females. The mean LogMAR visual acuity for both groups on day 1 (Group 1- 0.3 � 0.1, Group 2- 0.5 � 0.2) and day 30 (Group 1- 0.1 � 0.2, Group 2- 0.1 � 0.1) was statistically significant (P < 0.001), and the mean IOP value showed a statistically significant value (P < 0.009) on day 1 in Group 2 (15.0 � 2.4 mmHg) and on day 30 (P < 0.001) in both the groups (Group 1- 13.6 � 1.8 mmHg, Group 2- 13.5 � 2 mmHg). The horizontal and vertical k values also showed a statistically significant difference on day 1 and day 30 (P < 0.001). The mean percentage change of central corneal thickness (CCT) in Group 1 was 17.7% and in Group 2 was 17.4% on day 1, and it was 1.1% on day 30 in both the groups, which was statistically significant (P < 0.001) compared to preoperative values. The percentage change in endothelial cell density on day 1 was 9% in Group 1 and 4.6% in Group 2, which was statistically significant (P < 0.001). On day 30, it was 9.7% and 4.8%, respectively, which was statistically significant (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Our study highlights statistically significant endothelial cell loss with viscoelastic-assisted nuclear delivery compared to BSS-assisted nuclear delivery during MSICS in a short follow-up of 1 month. The CCT values showed a slight increase, and the keratometry and IOP were unaffected compared to the preoperative parameters in both the groups