Monitoring and Morphologic Classification of Pediatric Cataract Using Slit-Lamp-Adapted Photography

Erping Long, Zhuoling Lin, Jingjing Chen, Zhenzhen Liu, Qianzhong Cao, Haotian Lin, Weirong Chen, Yizhi Liu, Erping Long, Zhuoling Lin, Jingjing Chen, Zhenzhen Liu, Qianzhong Cao, Haotian Lin, Weirong Chen, Yizhi Liu

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the feasibility of pediatric cataract monitoring and morphologic classification using slit lamp-adapted anterior segmental photography in a large cohort that included uncooperative children.

Methods: Patients registered in the Childhood Cataract Program of the Chinese Ministry of Health were prospectively selected. Eligible patients underwent slit-lamp adapted anterior segmental photography to record and monitor the morphology of their cataractous lenses. A set of assistance techniques for slit lamp-adapted photography was developed to instruct the parents of uncooperative children how to help maintain the child's head position and keep the eyes open after sleep aid administration.

Results: Briefly, slit lamp-adapted photography was completed for all 438 children, including 260 (59.4%) uncooperative children with our assistance techniques. All 746 images of 438 patients successfully confirmed the diagnoses and classifications. Considering the lesion location, pediatric cataract morphologies could be objectively classified into the seven following types: total; nuclear; polar, including two subtypes (anterior and posterior); lamellar; nuclear combined with cortical, including three subtypes (coral-like, dust-like, and blue-dot); cortical; and Y suture. The top three types of unilateral cataracts were polar (55, 42.3%), total (42, 32.3%), and nuclear (23, 17.7%); and the top three types of bilateral cataracts were nuclear (110, 35.8%), total (102, 33.2%), and lamellar (34, 11.1%).

Conclusions: Slit lamp-adapted anterior segmental photography is applicable for monitoring and classifying the morphologies of pediatric cataracts and is even safe and feasible for uncooperative children with assistance techniques and sleep aid administration.

Translational relevance: This study proposes a novel strategy for the preoperative evaluation and evidence-based management of pediatric ophthalmology (Clinical Trials.gov, NCT02748031).

Keywords: Pediatric cataract monitoring; morphologic classification; preoperative evaluation.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Assistance techniques and equipment for slit-lamp-adapted photography among uncooperative children. (A, B) An infant with an immature spine and low weight (mostly under 1 year and less than 10 kg) was held up by his mother with one hand on the haunch and another hand on the abdomen, and the head position was adjusted by a technician. (C, D) Straps were used for a heavier child with a mature spine and moderate weight (from 1–2 years and less than 20 kg), and the head position was adjusted by a technician. (E, F) If a child was too heavy to be held up by his parents, even with straps (mostly older than 2 years and more than 20 kg), a transformable bed (our patented product) was used to support the child, and a technician helped adjust the head position (notes: permissions have been received to use patient likeness in the figure).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Flow chart of patient selection, examination and analysis. A total of 438 patients diagnosed with pediatric cataracts were finally included, containing 260 (59.4%, 260/438) uncooperative children with our assistance techniques and equipment, after sleep aid administration. Specifically, the assistance techniques were used in the following proportions: flying-baby posture (141, 54.2%), strap technique (97, 37.4%), and special transformable bed (22, 8.4%). All 746 slit-lamp images of the 438 pediatric patients were successfully diagnosed and classified.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Representative slit-lamp images of 10 types and subtypes of congenital cataract morphologies. Considering the lesion locations, the pediatric cataract morphologies could be objectively classified into seven types (or 10 subtypes): total; nuclear; polar, including two subtypes (anterior and posterior); lamellar; nuclear combined with cortical, including three subtypes (coral-like, dust-like, and blue-dot); cortical; and Y suture.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Histogram of the seven cataract types in all included patients with bilateral cataracts or unilateral cataracts. The top three types of unilateral cataracts were polar (55, 42.3%), total (42, 32.3%), and nuclear (23, 17.7%); the top three types of bilateral cataracts were nuclear (110, 35.8%), total (102, 33.2%), and lamellar (34, 11.1%). The polar type of cataract (both anterior and posterior subtypes) was mostly likely to be categorized as unilateral, while the most likely laterality categorization of other types or subtypes of cataract was bilateral. Nu + co, nuclear complicated with cortical cataracts.

References

    1. Amaya L, Taylor D, Russell-Eggitt I, Nischal KK, Lengyel D. . The morphology and natural history of childhood cataracts. Surv Ophthalmol. 2003; 48: 125– 144.
    1. Lambert SR, Drack AV. . Infantile cataracts. Surv Ophthalmol. 1996; 40: 427– 458.
    1. Forster JE, Abadi RV, Muldoon M, Lloyd IC. . Grading infantile cataracts. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2006; 26: 372– 379.
    1. Chua BE, Mitchell P, Cumming RG. . Effects of cataract type and location on visual function: the Blue Mountains Eye Study. Eye (Lond). 2004; 18: 765– 772.
    1. Haargaard B, Wohlfahrt J, Fledelius HC, Rosenberg T, Melbye M. . A nationwide Danish study of 1027 cases of congenital/infantile cataracts: etiological and clinical classifications. Ophthalmology. 2004; 111: 2292– 2298.
    1. Mireskandari K, Tehrani NN, Vandenhoven C, Ali A. . Anterior segment imaging in pediatric ophthalmology. J Cataract Refract Surg. 2011; 37: 2201– 2210.
    1. Farook M, Venkatramani J, Gazzard G, Cheng A, Tan D, Saw SM. . Comparisons of the handheld autorefractor, table-mounted autorefractor, and subjective refraction in Singapore adults. Optom Vis Sci. 2005; 82: 1066– 1070.
    1. Lukander K. . A system for tracking gaze on handheld devices. Behav Res Methods. 2006; 38: 660– 666.
    1. Jung W, Kim J, Jeon M, Chaney EJ, Stewart CN, Boppart SA. . Handheld optical coherence tomography scanner for primary care diagnostics. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2011; 58: 741– 744.
    1. Catré D, Lopes MF, Viana JS, Cabrita AS. . Perioperative morbidity and mortality in the first year of life: a systematic review (1997-2012). Braz J Anesthesiol. 2015; 65: 384– 394.
    1. Lin H, Chen W, Luo L,et al. . Effectiveness of a short message reminder in increasing compliance with pediatric cataract treatment: a randomized trial. Ophthalmology. 2012; 119: 2463– 2470.
    1. Brown N. . Cataract in childhood: photograph methods in assessment. Br J Ophthalmol. 1977; 61: 135– 140.
    1. Johnson CA, Howard DL, Marshall D, Shu H. . A noninvasive video-based method for measuring lens transmission properties of the human eye. Optom Vis Sci. 1993; 70: 944– 955.
    1. Chylack LT, Leske MC, McCarthy D, Khu P, Kashiwagi T, Sperduto R. . Lens opacities classification system II (LOCS II). Arch Ophthalmol. 1989; 107: 991– 997.
    1. Maraini G, Pasquini P, Tomba MC,et al. . An independent evaluation of the Lens Opacities Classification System II (LOCS II). The Italian-American Cataract Study Group. Ophthalmology. 1989; 96: 611– 615.
    1. Sasaki K, Shibata T, Obazawa H,et al. . Classification system for cataracts. Application by the Japanese Cooperative Cataract Epidemiology Study Group. Ophthalmic Res. 1990; 22 Suppl 1: 46– 50.
    1. Karbassi M, Magnante PC, Wolfe JK, Chylack LT. . Objective line spread function measurements, Snellen acuity, and LOCS II classification in patients with cataract. Optom Vis Sci. 1993; 70: 956– 962.
    1. Magno BV, Datiles MB, Lasa SM. . Senile cataract progression studies using the Lens Opacities Classification System II. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993; 34: 2138– 2141.
    1. Nováková D, Rozsíval P, . Evidence based medicine and cost-effectiveness analysis in ophthalmology [in Czech]. Cesk Slov Oftalmol. 2004; 60: 335– 341.
    1. Donahue SP, Arthur B, Neely DE, Arnold RW, Silbert D, Ruben JB. . Guidelines for automated preschool vision screening: a 10-year, evidence-based update. J AAPOS. 2013; 17: 4– 8.
    1. Robb RM, Petersen RA. . Outcome of treatment for bilateral congenital cataracts. Ophthalmic Surg. 1992; 23: 650– 656.
    1. Elliott DB. . Evaluating visual function in cataract. Optom Vis Sci. 1993; 70: 896– 902.
    1. Rahi JS, Dezateux C. . Congenital and infantile cataract in the United Kingdom: underlying or associated factors. British Congenital Cataract Interest Group. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000; 41: 2108– 2114.
    1. Lin H, Long E, Chen W, Liu Y. . Documenting rare disease data in China. Science. 2015; 349: 1064.
    1. Dolgin E. . The myopia boom. Nature. 2015; 519: 276– 278.
    1. Brown NA, Bron AJ, Ayliffe W, Sparrow J, Hill AR. . The objective assessment of cataract. Eye (Lond). 1987; 1 Pt 2: 234– 246.
    1. Foxworth MW, Nisbet RM. . Pediatric ocular photography platform. Am J Ophthalmol. 1979; 87: 717.
    1. Hero M, Harding SP, Riva CE, Winstanley PA, Peshu N, Photographic Marsh K. . and angiographic characterization of the retina of Kenyan children with severe malaria. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997; 115: 997– 1003.
    1. Arnold RW, Gionet EG, Jastrzebski AI,et al. . The Alaska Blind Child Discovery project: rationale, methods and results of 4000 screenings. Alaska Med. 2000; 42: 58– 72.
    1. Gan X, Lin H, Chen J, Lin Z, Lin Y, Chen W. . Rescue sedation with intranasal dexmedetomidine for pediatric ophthalmic examination after chloral hydrate failure: a randomized, controlled trial. Clin Ther. 2016; 38: 1522– 1529.
    1. Cao Q, Lin Y, Xie Z,et al. . Comparison of sedation by intranasal dexmedetomidine and oral chloral hydrate for pediatric ophthalmic examination. Paediatr Anaesth. 2017; 27: 629– 636
    1. Liu Y. . Pediatric Lens Diseases. Springer: Singapore; 2016.
    1. Klein BE, Klein R, Linton KL, Magli YL, Neider MW. . Assessment of cataracts from photographs in the Beaver Dam Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 1990; 97: 1428– 1433.
    1. Bailey IL, Bullimore MA, Raasch TW, Taylor HR. . Clinical grading and the effects of scaling. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1991; 32: 422– 432.
    1. Javitt JC, Brenner MH, Curbow B, Legro MW, Street DA. . Outcomes of cataract surgery. Improvement in visual acuity and subjective visual function after surgery in the first, second, and both eyes. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993; 111: 686– 691.
    1. Wilson ME, Trivedi RH, Morrison DG,et al. . The Infant Aphakia Treatment Study: evaluation of cataract morphology in eyes with monocular cataracts. J AAPOS. 2011; 15: 421– 426.
    1. West SK, Griffiths B, Shariff Y, Stephens D, Mireskandari K. . Utilisation of an outpatient sedation unit in paediatric ophthalmology: safety and effectiveness of chloral hydrate in 1509 sedation episodes. Br J Ophthalmol. 2013; 97: 1437– 1442.
    1. Long V, Chen S, Hatt S. . Surgical interventions for bilateral congenital cataract. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006: CD003171.
    1. Long E, Lin H, Liu Z,et al. . An artificial intelligence platform for the multihospital collaborative management of congenital cataracts. Nat Biomed Eng. 2017; 1: 1– 8.
    1. Lal G, Trivedi RH, Wilson ME, Scarlett LC, Peterseim MM. . Interocular axial length difference in eyes with pediatric cataracts. J AAPOS. 2005; 9: 358– 362.
    1. Johar SR, Savalia NK, Vasavada AR, Gupta PD. . Epidemiology based etiological study of pediatric cataract in western India. Indian J Med Sci. 2004; 58: 115– 121.
    1. Wilson ME, Hennig A, Trivedi RH, Thomas BJ, Singh SK. . Clinical characteristics and early postoperative outcomes of pediatric cataract surgery with IOL implantation from Lahan, Nepal. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus. 2011; 48: 286– 291.
    1. Lin H, Lin D, Liu Z,et al. . A novel congenital cataract category system based on lens opacity locations and relevant anterior segment characteristics. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2016; 57: 6389– 6395.

Source: PubMed

3
Subscribe