ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2026
Automated measurement of macular neovascularization lesion size in nAMD using AI segmentation.
Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Choroidal vascularity across aging and the spectrum of age-related macular degeneration: an AI-based OCT study.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare artificial intelligence (AI)-based annotations of hyperreflective material (HRM) and manual demarcation of macular neovascularization (MNV) on optical coherence tomography (OCT) volume scans in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD), and to assess the suitability of AI-driven OCT segmentation for longitudinal lesion monitoring.
methodsIn this retrospective study, 42 eyes from 36 patients (21 f, 15 m; mean age baseline 76.6 y) with exudative nAMD were analyzed using longitudinal spectral-domain OCT data. Manual MNV demarcations on en-face OCT projections served as ground truth and were compared to AI-predicted HRM segmentations generated by a 3D nU-Net model on OCT scans. HRM and MNV lesion areas were quantified at multiple time points, and agreement between manual and AI-based measurements was evaluated using Pearson correlation, ordinary least squares regression and robust regression.
resultsA highly similar mean lesion growth was observed when comparing HRM/MNV lesion sizes in longitudinal measurements. Point-by-point comparison revealed a strong overall correlation (r = 0.78) between AI-predicted and manually annotated HRM areas with increasing significance with longer follow-up. However, two aspects were responsible for some AI measurements being larger than manual measurements: At baseline, AI measurements included hyperreflective subretinal fluid as HRM, which was resorbed after three anti-VEGF injections, and during longer-term follow-up, manually annotated MNV areas were occasionally smaller than those derived from AI-based HRM segmentation due to the manual underestimation of very thin HRM.
conclusionsAI-based segmentation of HRM on OCT scans demonstrates strong overall agreement with manual MNV measurements, particularly on longitudinal assessments. Despite some AI-based overestimations occurring at baseline and some manual MNV underestimations during follow-up, measurements between both methods were highly comparable over time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.