22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Corneal power evaluation after myopic corneal refractive surgery using artificial neural networks

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Efficacy and high availability of surgery techniques for refractive defect correction increase the number of patients who undergo to this type of surgery. Regardless of that, with increasing age, more and more patients must undergo cataract surgery. Accurate evaluation of corneal power is an extremely important element affecting the precision of intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation and errors in this procedure could affect quality of life of patients and satisfaction with the service provided. The available device able to measure corneal power have been tested to be not reliable after myopic refractive surgery.

          Methods

          Artificial neural networks with error backpropagation and one hidden layer were proposed for corneal power prediction. The article analysed the features acquired from the Pentacam HR tomograph, which was necessary to measure the corneal power. Additionally, several billion iterations of artificial neural networks were conducted for several hundred simulations of different network configurations and different features derived from the Pentacam HR. The analysis was performed on a PC with Intel ® Xeon ® X5680 3.33 GHz CPU in Matlab ® Version 7.11.0.584 (R2010b) with Signal Processing Toolbox Version 7.1 (R2010b), Neural Network Toolbox 7.0 (R2010b) and Statistics Toolbox (R2010b).

          Results and conclusions

          A total corneal power prediction error was obtained for 172 patients (113 patients forming the training set and 59 patients in the test set) with an average age of 32 ± 9.4 years, including 67% of men. The error was at an average level of 0.16 ± 0.14 diopters and its maximum value did not exceed 0.75 dioptres. The Pentacam parameters (measurement results) providing the above result are tangential anterial/posterior. The corneal net power and equivalent k-reading power. The analysis time for a single patient (a single eye) did not exceed 0.1 s, whereas the time of network training was about 3 s for 1000 iterations (the number of neurons in the hidden layer was 400).

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Comparison of Newer Intraocular Lens Power Calculation Methods for Eyes after Corneal Refractive Surgery.

          To compare the newer formulae, the optical coherence tomography (OCT)-based intraocular lens (IOL) power formula (OCT formula) and the Barrett True-K formula (True-K), with the methods on the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery (ASCRS) calculator in eyes with previous myopic LASIK/photorefractive keratectomy (PRK).
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Evaluation of new suspension system for limb prosthetics

            Background Good prosthetic suspension system secures the residual limb inside the prosthetic socket and enables easy donning and doffing. This study aimed to introduce, evaluate and compare a newly designed prosthetic suspension system (HOLO) with the current suspension systems (suction, pin/lock and magnetic systems). Methods All the suspension systems were tested (tensile testing machine) in terms of the degree of the shear strength and the patient’s comfort. Nine transtibial amputees participated in this study. The patients were asked to use four different suspension systems. Afterwards, each participant completed a questionnaire for each system to evaluate their comfort. Furthermore, the systems were compared in terms of the cost. Results The maximum tensile load that the new system could bear was 490 N (SD, 5.5) before the system failed. Pin/lock, magnetic and suction suspension systems could tolerate loads of580 N (SD, 8.5), 350.9 (SD, 7) and 310 N (SD, 8.4), respectively. Our subjects were satisfied with the new hook and loop system, particularly in terms of easy donning and doffing. Furthermore, the new system is considerably cheaper (35 times) than the current locking systems in the market. Conclusions The new suspension system could successfully retain the prosthesis on the residual limb as a good alternative for lower limb amputees. In addition, the new system addresses some problems of the existing systems and is more cost effective than its counterparts.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Improved accuracy of intraocular lens power calculation with the Zeiss IOLMaster.

              This study aimed to demonstrate how the level of accuracy in intraocular lens (IOL) power calculation can be improved with optical biometry using partial optical coherence interferometry (PCI) (Zeiss IOLMaster) and current anterior chamber depth (ACD) prediction algorithms. Intraocular lens power in 461 consecutive cataract operations was calculated using both PCI and ultrasound and the accuracy of the results of each technique were compared. To illustrate the importance of ACD prediction per se, predictions were calculated using both a recently published 5-variable method and the Haigis 2-variable method and the results compared. All calculations were optimized in retrospect to account for systematic errors, including IOL constants and other off-set errors. The average absolute IOL prediction error (observed minus expected refraction) was 0.65 dioptres with ultrasound and 0.43 D with PCI using the 5-variable ACD prediction method (p < 0.00001). The number of predictions within +/- 0.5 D, +/- 1.0 D and +/- 2.0 D of the expected outcome was 62.5%, 92.4% and 99.9% with PCI, compared with 45.5%, 77.3% and 98.4% with ultrasound, respectively (p < 0.00001). The 2-variable ACD method resulted in an average error in PCI predictions of 0.46 D, which was significantly higher than the error in the 5-variable method (p < 0.001). The accuracy of IOL power calculation can be significantly improved using calibrated axial length readings obtained with PCI and modern IOL power calculation formulas incorporating the latest generation ACD prediction algorithms.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                +48 323 689 741 , robert.koprowski@us.edu.pl
                mic.lanza@gmail.com
                dottirregolare@hotmail.com
                Journal
                Biomed Eng Online
                Biomed Eng Online
                BioMedical Engineering OnLine
                BioMed Central (London )
                1475-925X
                15 November 2016
                15 November 2016
                2016
                : 15
                : 121
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Biomedical Computer Systems, Faculty of Computer Science and Materials Science, Institute of Computer Science, University of Silesia, ul. Będzińska 39, 41-200 Sosnowiec, Poland
                [2 ]Dipartimento Multidisciplinare di Scienze Mediche, Chirurgiche e Odontoiatriche, Seconda Università di Napoli, Naples, Italy
                [3 ]Centro Grandi Apparecchiature, Seconda Università di Napoli, Naples, Italy
                Article
                243
                10.1186/s12938-016-0243-5
                5111354
                27846894
                74605532-7aaf-4d09-9c5d-9b20be026544
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 20 October 2016
                : 9 November 2016
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Biomedical engineering
                signal processing,neural networks,corneal power,refractive surgery,iol power calculation

                Comments

                Comment on this article