Search

Aim: To assess the performance of smartphone based wide-field retinal imaging (WFI) versus ultra-wide-field imaging (UWFI) for assessment of sight-threatening diabetic retinopathy (STDR) as well as locating predominantly peripheral lesions (PPL) of DR., Methods: Individuals with type 2 diabetes with varying grades of DR underwent nonmydriatic UWFI with Daytona Plus camera followed by mydriatic WFI with smartphone-based Vistaro camera at a tertiary care diabetes centre in South India in 2021-22. Grading of DR as well as identification of PPL (DR lesions beyond the posterior pole) in the retinal images of both cameras was performed by senior retina specialists. STDR was defined by the presence of severe non-proliferative DR, proliferative DR or diabetic macular oedema (DME). The sensitivity and specificity of smartphone based WFI for detection of PPL and STDR was assessed. Agreement between the graders for both cameras was compared., Results: Retinal imaging was carried out in 318 eyes of 160 individuals (mean age 54.7 ± 9 years; mean duration of diabetes 16.6 ± 7.9 years). The sensitivity and specificity for detection of STDR by Vistaro camera was 92.7% (95% CI 80.1-98.5) and 96.6% (95% CI 91.5-99.1) respectively and 95.1% (95% CI 83.5-99.4) and 95.7% (95% CI 90.3-98.6) by Daytona Plus respectively. PPL were detected in 89 (27.9%) eyes by WFI by Vistaro camera and in 160 (50.3%) eyes by UWFI. However, this did not translate to any significant difference in the grading of STDR between the two imaging systems. In both devices, PPL were most common in supero-temporal quadrant (34%). The prevalence of PPL increased with increasing severity of DR with both cameras (p < 0.001). The kappa comparison between the 2 graders for varying grades of severity of DR was 0.802 (p < 0.001) for Vistaro and 0.753 (p < 0.001) for Daytona Plus camera., Conclusion: Mydriatic smartphone-based widefield imaging has high sensitivity and specificity for detecting STDR and can be used to screen for peripheral retinal lesions beyond the posterior pole in individuals with diabetes., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The global burden of diabetes has resulted in an increase in the prevalence of diabetic retinopathy (DR), a microvascular complication of diabetes. Lifelong repetitive screening for DR is essential for early detection and timely management to prevent visual impairment due to the silent sight-threatening disorder. Colour fundus photography (CFP) is helpful for documentation of the retinopathy as well as for counselling the patient. CFP has established roles in DR screening, detection, progression and monitoring of treatment response. DR screening programmes use validated mydriatic or non-mydriatic fundus cameras for retinal imaging and trained image graders identify referable DR. Smartphone-based fundus cameras and handheld fundus cameras that are cost-effective, portable and easy to handle in remote places are gaining popularity in recent years. The images captured with these low-cost devices can be immediately sent to trained ophthalmologists for grading of DR. Recent increase in numbers of telemedicine programmes based on imaging with digital fundus cameras and remote interpretation has facilitated larger population coverage of DR screening and timely referral of those with sight-threatening DR to ophthalmologists. Good-quality retinal imaging and accurate diagnosis are essential to reduce inappropriate referrals. Advances in digital imaging such as ultra-wide field imaging and multi-modal imaging have opened new avenues for assessing DR. Fundus cameras with integrated artificial intelligence (AI)-based automated algorithms can also provide instant DR diagnosis and reduce the burden of healthcare systems. We review the different types of fundus cameras currently used in DR screening and management around the world.

Purpose: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of smartphone-based nonmydriatic (NM) retinal camera in the detection of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and sight-threatening DR (STDR) in a tertiary eye care facility., Methods: Patients with diabetes underwent retinal photography with a smartphone-based NM fundus camera before mydriasis and standard 7-field fundus photography with a desktop mydriatic fundus camera after mydriasis. DR was graded using the international clinical classification of diabetic retinopathy system by two retinal expert ophthalmologists masked to each other and to the patient's identity. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) to detect DR and STDR by NM retinal imaging were assessed., Results: 245 people had gradable images in one or both eyes. DR and STDR were detected in 45.3% and 24.5%, respectively using NM camera, and in 57.6% and 28.6%, respectively using mydriatic camera. The sensitivity and specificity to detect any DR by NM camera was 75.2% (95% confidence interval (CI) 68.1-82.3) and 95.2% (95%CI 91.1-99.3). For STDR the values were 82.9% (95% CI 74.0-91.7) and 98.9% (95% CI 97.3-100), respectively. The PPV to detect any DR was 95.5% (95% CI 89.8-98.5) and NPV was 73.9% (95% CI 66.4-81.3); PPV for STDR detection was 96.7% (95% CI 92.1-100)) and NPV was 93.5% (95% CI 90.0-97.1)., Conclusion: Smartphone-based NM retinal camera had fairly high sensitivity and specificity for detection of DR and STDR in this clinic-based study. Further studies are warranted in other settings., Competing Interests: None

Aim: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of "fundus on phone' (FOP) camera, a smartphone based retinal imaging system, as a screening tool for diabetic retinopathy (DR) detection and DR severity in comparison with 7-standard field digital retinal photography., Design: Single-site, prospective, comparative, instrument validation study., Methods: 301 patients (602 eyes) with type 2 diabetes underwent standard seven-field digital fundus photography with both Carl Zeiss fundus camera and indigenous FOP at a tertiary care diabetes centre in South India. Grading of DR was performed by two independent retina specialists using modified Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study grading system. Sight threatening DR (STDR) was defined by the presence of proliferative DR(PDR) or diabetic macular edema. The sensitivity, specificity and image quality were assessed., Results: The mean age of the participants was 53.5 ±9.6 years and mean duration of diabetes 12.5±7.3 years. The Zeiss camera showed that 43.9% had non-proliferative DR(NPDR) and 15.3% had PDR while the FOP camera showed that 40.2% had NPDR and 15.3% had PDR. The sensitivity and specificity for detecting any DR by FOP was 92.7% (95%CI 87.8-96.1) and 98.4% (95%CI 94.3-99.8) respectively and the kappa (ĸ) agreement was 0.90 (95%CI-0.85-0.95 p<0.001) while for STDR, the sensitivity was 87.9% (95%CI 83.2-92.9), specificity 94.9% (95%CI 89.7-98.2) and ĸ agreement was 0.80 (95%CI 0.71-0.89 p<0.001), compared to conventional photography., Conclusion: Retinal photography using FOP camera is effective for screening and diagnosis of DR and STDR with high sensitivity and specificity and has substantial agreement with conventional retinal photography.