Objective assessment of corneal staining using digital image analysis.

PURPOSE To validate a new objective digital image analysis technique to evaluate corneal staining. METHODS One hundred photographs of corneal staining from various ocular surface diseases in 100 patients were quantified by a new strategy: a combination of the difference of Gaussians (DoG) edge detection for morphologic properties of corneal erosions and the red-green-blue (RGB) systems and hue-saturation-value (HSV) color model for detection of color. To enhance the image, we adopted a median filter, Otsu thresholding, and contrast-limited adaptive histogram equalization (CLAHE). To validate the diagnostic value of this new strategy, the same photographs were also graded by two independent clinicians using the Oxford scheme and the National Eye Institute/Industry (NEI)-recommended guidelines. The correlation between the average subjective grade and objective image analysis measurement was evaluated using the Pearson's correlation coefficient. RESULTS The new algorithm showed a strong correlation with the clinical grading scale in the Oxford scheme and the NEI-recommended guidelines (R = 0.850 and 0.903, P < 0.001, respectively). The repeatability of the objective measurement was excellent (R = 0.994). CONCLUSIONS The new algorithm showed excellent correlation with the traditional subjective clinical grading scales. It may be useful for objective assessment of corneal staining, independent of disease conditions.

[1]  P. D. Joyce Corneal vital staining , 1967, Irish journal of medical science.

[2]  J. Wolffsohn,et al.  Sensitivity and reliability of objective image analysis compared to subjective grading of bulbar hyperaemia , 2007, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[3]  E. Papas,et al.  Key factors in the subjective and objective assessment of conjunctival erythema. , 2000, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[4]  N. Hutchings,et al.  The use of fractal analysis and photometry to estimate the accuracy of bulbar redness grading scales. , 2008, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[5]  Paul Fieguth,et al.  Automated measurement of bulbar redness. , 2002, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[6]  John Daugman,et al.  How iris recognition works , 2002, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology.

[7]  Natalie Hutchings,et al.  Grading bulbar redness using cross-calibrated clinical grading scales. , 2011, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[8]  Nathan Efron,et al.  Validation of grading scales for contact lens complications , 2001, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[9]  Christophe Baudouin,et al.  The definition and classification of dry eye disease: report of the Definition and Classification Subcommittee of the International Dry Eye WorkShop (2007). , 2007, The ocular surface.

[11]  N. Otsu A threshold selection method from gray level histograms , 1979 .

[12]  J. Wolffsohn,et al.  Clinical monitoring of ocular physiology using digital image analysis. , 2003, Contact lens & anterior eye : the journal of the British Contact Lens Association.

[13]  N Efron,et al.  Grading scales for contact lens complications , 1998, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[14]  Jeong-Min Hwang,et al.  New clinical grading scales and objective measurement for conjunctival injection. , 2013, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[15]  Patrick Pérez,et al.  Color-Based Probabilistic Tracking , 2002, ECCV.

[16]  S M Pizer,et al.  Effective presentation of medical images on an electronic display station. , 1987, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[17]  M. Lemp Report of the National Eye Institute/Industry workshop on Clinical Trials in Dry Eyes. , 1995, The CLAO journal : official publication of the Contact Lens Association of Ophthalmologists, Inc.

[18]  T Grant,et al.  CCLRU standards for success of daily and extended wear contact lenses. , 1993, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[19]  I L Bailey,et al.  Clinical grading and the effects of scaling. , 1991, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[20]  A. Bron,et al.  Grading Of Corneal and Conjunctival Staining in the Context of Other Dry Eye Tests , 2003, Cornea.

[21]  J. Wolffsohn,et al.  Objective Grading of The Anterior Eye , 2009, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[22]  N. Pritchard,et al.  Subjective and objective measures of corneal staining related to multipurpose care systems. , 2003, Contact lens & anterior eye : the journal of the British Contact Lens Association.