Akıllı Telefon Tabanlı Kamera Kullanarak Av Köpeklerinin Gözlerinin Fundus Muayenesinin Değerlendirilmesi

Year 2020, , 183 - 188, 23.12.2020

Özlem Şengöz Şirin

https://doi.org/10.31196/huvfd.807349

Abstract

Akıllı telefon tabanlı telefon ile fundus görüntülenmesi özellikle uyumsuz olarak kabul edilen hasta gruplarında (pediatrik/geriatrik vb.) pratik bir şekilde görüntülerin elde edildiği sınırlı sayıdaki literatürde bildirilmiştir. Bu çalışmada 20 av köpeğinin her iki gözü incelenerek çoklu fotoğraf serisi (1 saniye aralıklarla 20 ardışık otomatik çekim serisi) ve video görüntüsü (30 saniye ve/veya 60 saniye aralıklarla kaydedilen video) kaydedilmiştir. Hastalar önce herhangi bir müdahale olmaksızın muayene edildi. Daha sonra midriyatik damlalar uygulandı ve etkili süre içinde muayene tekrarlandı. Muayenede optik sinir başı, tapetum lucidum, nontepatal bölge, retina damarları ve arka segmentte koroid damarlar görüntülendi. Tapetum lucidum'un fotoğrafını çekerken fokal ışık yapaylıkları yaygındı. Tapetum lucidum'u görüntülemek için minimum ışık yoğunluğu seçildi. Midriyatik damla öncesi yapılan muayeneler ile midriyatik damla sonrası yapılan muayeneler arasında anlamlı bir farklılık gözlenmedi. Klinik faydayı resmi olarak değerlendirmek için daha ileri çalışmalar önerilir.

Keywords

Akıllı telefon tabanlı kamera, D-EYE, köpek, retinal muayene

Evaluation of Fundus Examination of Hunting Dogs' Eyes Using a Smartphone-Based Camera

Abstract

Fundus imaging with a smartphone-based camera has been reported in a limited number of literature, particularly in patient groups (pediatric/geriatric ie.) considered to be incompatible. In this study, by examining both eyes of 20 hunting dogs, multiple shooting series (20 sequential shooting automatic series with 1-second interval) and video sequence (a video that started shooting at 30-second and/or 60-second intervals) were recorded. The patients were first examined without any intervention. Afterwards, mydriatic drops were applied and the examination was repeated within the effective period. During the examination, optic disc nerve head, tapetum lucidum, non-tepatal region, retinal vessels, and choroid vessels were visualized in the posterior segment. Focal light artifacts were common when photographing the tapetum lucidum. The minimum light intensity was chosen to display the tapetum lucidum. No significant difference was observed between the examinations performed before the mydriatic drop and the examinations performed after the mydriatic drop. Further studies are recommended to formally assess clinical benefit.

Keywords

Smartphone-based camera, D-EYE, dog, retinal examination

References

• 1. Anonym 2020. https://www.deyecare.com/ Accession date; 01.05.2020. Russo A, Morescalchi F, Costagliola C, Romano MR, Marino IG, 2014: Comparison of smartphone-based ophthalmoscopy versus dilated ophthalmic examination to detect ocular pathologic features.
• 2. Baeza M, Orozco-Beltrán D, Gil-Guillen VF, Pedrera V, Ribera MC, Pertusa S, Merino J, 2009: Screening for sight threatening diabetic retinopathy using non-mydriatic retinal camera in a primary care setting: to dilate or not to dilate? nt. J Clin Pract, 63 (3): 433-438.
• 3. Balland O, Russo A, Isard PF, Mathieson I, Semeraro F, Dulaurent T, 2017: Assessment of a smartphone-based camera for fundus imaging in animals. Vet Ophthalmol, 20 (1): 89-94.
• 4. Gelatt KN, Gilger BJ, Kern TJ, 2013: Veterinary Ophthalmology. 5th ed, Wiley Blackwell, New Jersey, USA.
• 5. Gomes FE, Ledbetter E, 2019: Canine and feline fundus photography and videography using a nonpatented 3D printed lens adapter for a smartphone. Vet Ophthalmol, 22 (1): 82-92.
• 6. Haddock LJ, Qian MD, 2015: Smartphone technology for fundus photography greater portability could mean greater versatility. Retin Physician, 12 (6): 51-58.
• 7. Kanemaki N, Inaniwa M, Terakado K, Kawarai S, Ichikawa Y, 2017: Fundus photography with a smartphone in indirect ophthalmoscopy in dogs and cats. Vet Ophthalmol, 20 (3): 280-284.
• 8. Khanamiri HN, Nakatsuka A, El-Annan J, 2017: Smartphone fundus photography. J Vis Exp, 125: 1-5.
• 9. Kim DY, Delori F, Mukai S, 2012: Smartphone photography safety. J Ophthalmol, 119 (10): 2200-2201.
• 10. Maamari RD, Keenan JD, Fletcher D.A, Margolis TP, 2014: A mobile phone-based retinal camera for portable wide field imaging. Br J Ophthalmol, 98 (4): 438-441.
• 11. Mamtora S, Sandinha MT, Ajith A, Song A, Steel DHW, 2018: Smartphone ophthalmoscopy: a potential replacement for the direct ophthalmoscope. Eye, 32 (11): 1766-1771.
• 12. Ofri R, 2008: Retina. In “Slatter’s Fundamentals of Veterinary Ophthalmology”, Ed; Maggs DJ, Miller PE, Ofri R, Saunder Elsevier, Missouri USA.
• 13. Russo A, Mapham W, Turano R, Costagliola C, Morescalchi F, Semeraro F, 2014: Comparison of smartphone ophthalmoscopy with slit-lamp biomicroscopy for grading vertical cup-to-disc ratio. J Glaucoma, 25 (9): 777-781.
• 14. Russo A, Morescalchi F, Costagliola C, Delcassi L, Semeraro F, 2015: Comparison of smartphone ophthalmoscopy with slit-lamp biomicroscopy for grading diabetic retinopathy. Am J Ophthalmol, 159 (2): 360-364.
• 15. Ryan ME, Rajalakshmi R, Prathiba V, Anjana RM, Ranjani H, Narayan KMV, Olsen TW, Mohan V, Ward LA, Lynn MJ, Hendrick A, 2015: Comparison Among Methods of Retinopathy Assessment (CAMRA) study. J Ophthalmol, 122 (10): 2038-2043.
• 16. Shen BY, Mukai SA, 2017: Portable, Inexpensive, Nonmydriatic Fundus Camera Based on the Raspberry Pi® Computer. J Ophthalmol, 14: 1-5.