Dry eye is matched by increased intrasubject variability in tear osmolarity as confirmed by machine learning approach
Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol (Engl Ed). 2019 Jul;94(7):337-342.
doi: 10.1016/j.oftal.2019.03.007.
Epub 2019 May 20.
[Article in
English,
Spanish]
Authors
C Cartes
1
, D López
1
, D Salinas
1
, C Segovia
2
, C Ahumada
2
, N Pérez
2
, F Valenzuela
3
, N Lanza
4
, R O López Solís
5
, V L Perez
6
, P Zegers
7
, A Fuentes
7
, C Alarcón
8
, L Traipe
9
Affiliations
- 1 Centro de la Visión, Filial Clínica Las Condes, Santiago, Chile.
- 2 School of Medical Technology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Chile, Independencia, Santiago, Chile.
- 3 Fundación Oftalmológica Los Andes, Vitacura, Santiago, Chile.
- 4 Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, University of Miami, Miami, Fl, Estados Unidos.
- 5 Institute for Biomedical Sciences (Cellular and Molecular Biology), Faculty of Medicine, University of Chile, Independencia, Santiago, Chile.
- 6 Duke Eye Center for Ocular Immunology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, Estados Unidos.
- 7 College of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Universidad de los Andes, Santiago, Chile.
- 8 Private Practice, Santiago, Chile.
- 9 Centro de la Visión, Filial Clínica Las Condes, Santiago, Chile. Electronic address: ltraipe@gmail.com.
Abstract
Objective:
Because of high variability, tear film osmolarity measures have been questioned in dry eye assessment. Understanding the origin of such variability would aid data interpretation. This study aims to evaluate osmolarity variability in a clinical setting.
Material and methods:
Twenty dry eyes and 20 control patients were evaluated. Three consecutive osmolarity measurements per eye at 5min intervals were obtained. Variability was represented by the difference between both extreme readings per eye. Machine learning techniques were used to quantify discrimination capacity of tear osmolarity for dry eye.
Results:
Mean osmolarities in the control and dry eye groups were 295.1±7.3mOsm/L and 300.6±11.2mOsm/L, respectively (P=.004). Osmolarity variabilities were 7.5±3.6mOsm/L and 16.7±11.9mOsm/L, for the control and dry eye groups, respectively (P<.001). Based on osmolarity, a logistic classifier showed an 85% classification accuracy.
Conclusions:
In the clinical setting, both mean osmolarity and osmolarity variability in the dry eye group were significantly higher than in the control group. Machine learning techniques showed good classification accuracy. It is concluded that higher variability of tear osmolarity is a dry eye feature.
Keywords:
Aprendizaje de máquinas; Dry eye; Machine learning; Ojo seco; Osmolaridad; Osmolarity; Variabilidad; Variability.
Copyright © 2019 Sociedad Española de Oftalmología. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.
MeSH terms
-
Adolescent
-
Adult
-
Biological Variation, Individual
-
Dry Eye Syndromes / diagnosis*
-
Dry Eye Syndromes / metabolism
-
Female
-
Humans
-
Machine Learning*
-
Male
-
Middle Aged
-
Osmolar Concentration
-
Tears / chemistry*
-
Young Adult