Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Ahmed I ElSayegh | UNKNOWN |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Background and Rationale:
Laser vision correction procedures, such as LASIK (Laser-Assisted In Situ Keratomileusis), PRK (Photorefractive Keratectomy), and SMILE (Small Incision Lenticule Extraction), are highly effective but require careful preoperative screening to ensure safety. One of the most critical aspects of screening is identifying keratoconus and other corneal ectatic disorders-conditions that cause progressive thinning and bulging of the cornea, often contraindicating surgery. Early detection is essential to avoid vision-threatening complications.
Despite advanced corneal imaging tools such as Scheimpflug tomography and anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT), accurate diagnosis-particularly in borderline or early-stage cases-remains challenging and subject to variability in human interpretation. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers the potential to improve diagnostic precision, reduce oversight, and standardize surgical planning.
Purpose of the Study:
This study evaluates the performance of AEYE (Automated Evaluation for Your Eye), a multi-agent AI system designed to support ophthalmologists in diagnosing keratoconus and determining refractive surgery eligibility. AEYE simulates the clinical workflow of an anterior segment specialist by orchestrating three specialized agents:
History & Risk Agent: Reviews patient history and extracts risk factors.
Imaging Agent: Analyzes corneal tomography, AS-OCT, and epithelial mapping scans.
Surgical Decision Agent: Integrates all findings, assigns a diagnosis, and recommends appropriate treatment options, including surgical eligibility or corneal cross-linking (CXL).
Study Design:
The study includes 50 real-world patient cases, both retrospective (from 2020 onward) and prospective, who were evaluated for refractive surgery or keratoconus. Each case is analyzed independently by AEYE and a consultant ophthalmologist (blinded to AI output), using the same multimodal clinical and imaging data. Diagnostic accuracy, agreement in surgical recommendations, and workflow efficiency are assessed.
Anticipated Impact:
By comparing AI-derived decisions with expert clinical judgment, this study aims to validate whether structured AI workflows like AEYE can serve as reliable, safe, and explainable decision support tools. If successful, AEYE may offer a scalable solution to reduce diagnostic variability and enhance the safety and consistency of refractive surgery screening.
Technical Protocol Summary
This is a diagnostic performance study evaluating AEYE (Automated Evaluation for Your Eye), an orchestrated multi-agent artificial intelligence (AI) system designed to assist ophthalmologists in the screening and management of keratoconus and refractive surgery planning. AEYE combines large language models (LLMs) with deterministic code logic to replicate and support the clinical decision-making process typically performed by anterior segment specialists.
System Architecture and Workflow
AEYE is structured as a modular pipeline of three specialized agents, each focused on a distinct diagnostic task:
History and Risk Agent: Extracts structured data from unstructured clinical records, including demographics, ocular/systemic history, medication use, and risk factors relevant to keratoconus or refractive surgery eligibility.
Imaging Analysis Agent: Processes multimodal anterior segment imaging such as Scheimpflug-based tomography (e.g., Pentacam), anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT), and epithelial thickness mapping. It standardizes key metrics like maximum keratometry (Kmax), thinnest corneal pachymetry, anterior/posterior elevation, Belin-Ambrósio Deviation Index (BAD-D), and Pachymetric Progression Index (PPI). Each eye and each imaging file is processed independently to avoid misattribution.
Surgical Decision Agent: Integrates the outputs of the previous agents to generate a final diagnosis, assign keratoconus staging (e.g., ABCD, Amsler-Krumeich classification), and recommend next steps, such as LASIK (Laser-Assisted In Situ Keratomileusis), PRK (Photorefractive Keratectomy), SMILE (Small Incision Lenticule Extraction), phakic intraocular lenses (ICL), or corneal collagen cross-linking (CXL). The output is a structured, auditable report.
All agents are controlled by a deterministic workflow using Python scripts for data merging, schema validation, and output formatting. Structured memory is maintained using JSON objects that store the full diagnostic context per patient. The system is designed to ensure reproducibility, reduce human variability, and support explainable clinical decision-making.
Study Workflow and Scope
Fifty real-world patient cases are included, comprising both retrospective records (from January 2020 onward) and newly enrolled prospective cases. Each case includes comprehensive clinical data and anterior segment imaging. AEYE analyzes the case and generates a structured report. Separately, an experienced ophthalmologist (blinded to the AI output) reviews the same data and records their clinical decisions.
Key metrics include:
Diagnostic accuracy of keratoconus detection. Agreement in surgical eligibility assessments. Efficiency of workflow execution. Variability in results across different LLMs used in agent roles. Cases with discordant results may undergo adjudication to establish a reference standard.
Innovation and Clinical Relevance.
AEYE represents a novel application of explainable AI in ophthalmology. Its multi-agent design reflects a divide-and-conquer strategy, reducing cognitive load on any single model while enforcing clinical safety through deterministic logic. The system supports scalability, modularity, and integration into electronic health record (EHR) systems. The study will help determine whether AEYE can function as a safe, consistent, and effective assistant in complex diagnostic pathways for corneal ectatic disease.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Patients with refractive errors or keratoconus assessed by agentic AI workflow and consultant review | This group includes all patients with refractive errors or keratoconus evaluated at our center during the study period. Each patient case undergoes comprehensive diagnostic assessment using both an orchestrated multi-agent artificial intelligence (AI) workflow (AEYE) and independent review by a consultant ophthalmologist. The AI workflow integrates multiple specialized AI agents to analyze clinical data, imaging studies, and relevant diagnostic metrics. Results from the AI system are compared to consultant assessments to evaluate concordance, diagnostic accuracy, and workflow efficiency. Both retrospective patient records and prospectively enrolled cases are included in this group. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Multi-Agent AI Diagnostic Workflow (AEYE) | Diagnostic Test | This intervention consists of an orchestrated diagnostic workflow utilizing multiple specialized artificial intelligence (AI) agents to analyze patient data and ophthalmic imaging for the diagnosis of refractive errors and keratoconus. The workflow, named Automated Evaluation for Your Eye (AEYE), integrates various AI modules designed for data extraction, image interpretation, and decision support. Each patient's clinical information, corneal topography, tomography, and other relevant imaging are processed sequentially through these AI agents, with results synthesized into a diagnostic recommendation. The system operates independently of clinician input, and outputs are blinded prior to comparison with consultant ophthalmologist assessments. The intervention is intended to assess diagnostic accuracy, efficiency, and concordance with expert clinical decision-making. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Diagnostic Accuracy of Multi-Agent AI Workflow Compared to Consultant Ophthalmologist | The primary outcome is the diagnostic accuracy of the orchestrated multi-agent AI workflow (AEYE) for detecting refractive errors and keratoconus, compared to independent diagnoses made by a consultant ophthalmologist. Accuracy will be assessed by calculating sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and overall concordance between AI and consultant findings. All assessments are blinded, and discrepancies will be adjudicated by a review panel. Both retrospective and prospective cases are included to capture real-world performance over a broad patient population. | From January 2020 to the anticipated study completion date (including retrospective review of cases from 2020 and prospective enrollment of new cases through 2025) |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Diagnosis of Refractive Error or Keratoconus:
Availability of Complete Data:
Eligible for Both AI and Consultant Review:
Consent:
No Restriction on Age or Sex:
Clinical Documentation Requirements:
Imaging and Diagnostic Data Requirements:
Diagnostic Spectrum Requirements:
Exclusion Criteria:
Incomplete or Poor Quality Data:
Ocular Comorbidities:
Severe Systemic Disease Affecting the Eye:
Inability or Refusal to Consent:
Participation in Conflicting Studies:
Clinical Documentation Exclusions:
Imaging and Data Quality Exclusions:
Case-Type Exclusions:
Technology-Specific Exclusions:
Other Considerations:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The study includes 50 anonymized patient cases collected from a private ophthalmology clinic. Patients were originally evaluated either for refractive surgery-including LASIK or other vision correction procedures-or for suspected or known keratoconus. Each case includes complete clinical documentation and high-quality corneal imaging (e.g., Pentacam, AS-OCT). The study population represents a typical clinical spectrum, including normal eyes, early or forme fruste keratoconus, post-CXL, and post-keratoplasty cases. All data was de-identified and retrospectively analyzed to assess the diagnostic performance of the AEYE system against expert human evaluation.
Not provided
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hazem Yassin Clinics | Cairo | Maadi | 11728 | Egypt |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Result | MedHELM: Holistic Evaluation of Large Language Models for Medical Tasks By: Suhana Bedi, Hejie Cui, Miguel Fuentes, Alyssa Unell, Michael Wornow, Juan M. Banda, Nikesh Kotecha, Timothy Keyes, Yifan Mai, Mert Oez, Hao Qiu, Shrey Jain, Leonardo Schettini, Mehr Kashyap, Jason Alan Fries, Akshay Swaminathan, Philip Chung, Fateme Nateghi, Asad Aali, Ashwin Nayak, Shivam Vedak, Sneha S. Jain, Birju Patel, Oluseyi Fayanju, Shreya Shah, Ethan Goh, Dong-han Yao, Brian Soetikno, Eduardo Reis, Sergios Gatidis, Vasu Divi, Robson Capasso, Rachna Saralkar, Chia-Chun Chiang, Jenelle Jindal, Tho Pham, Faraz Ghoddusi, Steven Lin, Albert S. Chiou, Christy Hong, Mohana Roy, Michael F. Gensheimer, Hinesh Patel, Kevin Schulman, Dev Dash, Danton Char, Lance Downing, Francois Grolleau, Kameron Black, Bethel Mieso, Aydin Zahedivash, Wen-wai Yim, Harshita Sharma, Tony Lee, Hannah Kirsch, Jennifer Lee, Nerissa Ambers, Carlene Lugtu, Aditya Sharma, Bilal Mawji, Alex Alekseyev, Vicky Zhou, Vikas Kakkar, Jarrod Helzer, Anurang Revri, Yair Bannett, Roxana Daneshjou, Jonathan Chen, Emily Alsentzer, Keith Morse, Nirmal Ravi, Nima Aghaeepour, Vanessa Kennedy, Akshay Chaudhari, Thomas Wang, Sanmi Koyejo, Matthew P. Lungren, Eric Horvitz, Percy Liang, Mike Pfeffer, Nigam H. Shah Journal: arxiv arXiv:2505.23802v2 Submitted on 26 May 2025 (v1), last revised 2 Jun 2025 | ||
| 40142244 |
| Label | URL |
|---|---|
| Authoritative resource on keratoconus pathophysiology, staging, and management | View source |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
|
| Olawade DB, Weerasinghe K, Mathugamage MDDE, Odetayo A, Aderinto N, Teke J, Boussios S. Enhancing Ophthalmic Diagnosis and Treatment with Artificial Intelligence. Medicina (Kaunas). 2025 Feb 28;61(3):433. doi: 10.3390/medicina61030433. |
| 36728651 | Result | Hubbard DC, Cox P, Redd TK. Assistive applications of artificial intelligence in ophthalmology. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2023 May 1;34(3):261-266. doi: 10.1097/ICU.0000000000000939. Epub 2022 Dec 29. |
| Provides context on refractive surgery evaluation and contraindications | View source |
| Details key imaging device and parameters used in AEYE workflow | View source |
| Describes the core orchestration framework used to implement AEYE's multi-agent design | View source |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D007640 | Keratoconus |
| D003316 | Corneal Diseases |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D005128 | Eye Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided