GlaucoSolve
Our mission is to save vision, one patient at a time
Who Are We?
Soham
Soham has experience as a bioengineering research assistant and is responsible for experimentation, engineering, and prototyping.
Brandon
Brandon is a coding prodigy and the lead software and AI developer for the product.
Owen
Owen is a future biologist and ophthalmologist and is responsible for organizing marketing, outreach, and web designs
Jeffery
Jeffrey is knowledgeable about Arduino and is responsible for engineering the hardware.
Hello, we are GlaucoSolve, a team of high school students passionate about bioengineering and entrepreneurship.
​
Vision serves as the connective thread weaving our life experiences together, enabling us to cherish special moments with one another. We believe vision is like a candle that burns bright for humanity; vision is one of the simplest, yet greatest sources of joy in the world. Sadly, glaucoma snuffs out that joy, devastating over 80 million people worldwide.
Among the most commonly employed treatments for glaucoma are eye drops containing beta-blockers to reduce IOP in patients. However, their effectiveness is limited by the inability to predict when patients will experience IOP spikes, which can spike 110% beyond normal levels in a matter of minutes at any time of day without one’s awareness. As a result, 15-20% of glaucoma patients following these prescription eye drop treatment plans still become completely blind in one eye within 10 years of diagnosis (Susanna et al., 2015). Because intraocular pressure (IOP) monitors are only accessible during hospital appointments, patients are kept in the dark of when to apply their eye drops to reduce their IOP. Furthermore, physicians can only determine if a treatment is ineffective months after being prescribed, but by then, the patient’s eyesight would have already permanently declined. Thus, there is a pressing, unmet need for a continuous, non-invasive, affordable, and user-operated IOP monitor.
Our Technology
Our innovation, GlaucoSolve Glasses is a non-invasive, wearable, cost-effective, and remote monitoring solution that uses ultrasound transducers, receivers, and Arduino modules to monitor IOP. By applying acoustic force to the cornea and analyzing the reflected signal, we
can compute various ultrasound parameters and correlate them to get the patient’s eye pressure. Realtime data will be sent to a mobile app allowing physicians to monitor long-term glaucoma progression remotely and alerting patients on when they should apply eye drops, mitigating optic nerve damage.
Moreover, we plan to develop a model with collected data, offering AI insights into glaucoma diagnosis. By learning nuanced IOP patterns in patients with all stages of glaucoma, it allows our model to help ophthalmologists spot signs of glaucoma and predict patients’ future IOP trajectory to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments just days after prescription.
3D Prototype Model
Physical Prototype
Video Explanation
Technology Schematic
Mobile App
Our Unique Value
So what separates GlaucoSolve from the rest of the IOP monitors? We hold the first wearable technology design capable of continuous IOP monitoring, with a significantly cheaper price point and remote physician monitoring feature. As you can see in the comparison table below, our product outshines each alternative IOP monitor in multiple key factors and is over five times cheaper than the current cheapest option.
The Science Behind GlaucoGlasses
Widely used in elasticity imaging, acoustic radiation force from ultrasound waves induces physical deformation in tissues- elucidating data about the elasticity of the tissue. Applying a known magnitude of acoustic force to the cornea of the eye will similarly enable the measurement of corneal deformation, as shown in Figure 1, offering insights into elasticity, which is known to be correlated to IOP (Lee et al., 2021). Four variables will be experimentally extracted from the reflected ultrasound signal, which will correlate to IOP. These four parameters are corneal deformation, flight time, amplitude, and acoustic impedance.
​
Corneal Deformation: The proposed technique to enable the calculation of the final corneal deformation (δ), which is the amount the cornea displaces from its initial position as a result of acoustic radiation force, is the fact that it is the absolute difference between the deformation due to acoustic radiation force and deformation due to IOP. For the average human eye, δ = 38999.76ARFPIOPT - 1116.06, where ARFP is the pressure from acoustic radiation force & IOPT is the true IOP in Pascals (Lee et al., 2021). Thus, corneal deformation should be inversely proportional to IOP, such that higher IOP is correlated with lower corneal deformation, and vice-versa.
​
Time of flight: The reflected ultrasound beam from the cornea has two paths: one under normal conditions (black beam in Figure 1) and another during corneal deformation (red beam in Figure 1). Due to the longer distance traveled by the red ultrasound beam, it is expected that the time of flight will be higher during corneal deformation- inversely correlating to IOP (Zhang et al., 2017).
​
Amplitude: When ultrasonic waves traverse through the air, energy losses, known as attenuation, occur due to scattering, absorption, and density differences at material interfaces. Greater corneal deformation results in longer wave travel, increased acoustic force loss to air, and diminished amplitude, which is the maximum magnitude of received signals, which is expected to be proportional to IOP (Zhang et al., 2017).
Acoustic Impedance: Acoustic Impedance is the resistance against ultrasound wave propagation through tissue, which results from the density of tissue and increases with higher IOP. It is calculated using the equation A1A0 = Z1 - Z0Z1 + Z0 , where A0 = a known constant amplitude of signal emitted, A0 = amplitude of signal received, Z0 = acoustic impedance of aqueous humor inside the eye ≈ 1.48 MPa, and Z1 = acoustic impedance of the cornea (Zhang et al., 2017).
Figure 1: Scientific concept of our technology
based on acoustic force induced corneal deformation.
Experimental Results
Experimental Setup
After engineering an Arduino-based prototype, experimentation was conducted using the apparatus shown in the image on the right. Since models of the human eye are expensive, the prototype was tested on gelatin phantoms made of gelatin powder and water- an accurate model of biological tissues often used for ultrasound imaging studies. Seven gelatin phantoms, each containing 70 mL of water, with varying gelatin concentrations (10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, and 40%) were created to simulate different IOP values of the eye and the ultrasound time of flight and amplitude were extracted for each model. They were then statistically correlated using a linear regression model to the true IOP, which was measured using the iCARE IC100 tonometer, pervasively used in clinics. The results were splendid, yielding a 92% accuracy of IOP correlation with a mean absolute error of solely 5 mmHg. The research paper preprint documenting experimental results is ready to be submitted to Frontiers publication, and the design patent is in the second stage of filing.
Figure 2: Correlation between corneal
displacement and true IOP. Deformation under ultrasound is inversely proportional to IOP with 75.36% correlation.
Figure 3: Correlation between ultrasound
amplitude and true IOP. Amplitude, the maximum ultrasound signal reflected, is proportional to IOP with 92.06% correlation.
Figure 4: Correlation between time of
ultrasound flight in air and true IOP. The time of flight is inversely proportional to IOP, with an 82.2% correlation.
Testimonies
Dr. Sewa Ram Singal, general physician at Humber River Hospital and Trillium Health Partners Credit Valley Hospital: “This product would be very beneficial and useable from the comfort of one’s home, reduce the need of going to an eye doctor in person.”
​
Dr. Shaffie Baidwal Gupta, ophthalmologist at Fortis Hospital: “It is a great thinking in this direction as glaucoma is actually a blinding disease.”
Referances
Baker, L., Mansouri, K., Quigley, H. A., & Sit, A. J. (2016). Update on 24-Hour IOP Monitoring. American Academy of Ophthalmology. https://www.aao.org/eyenet/article/update-on-24-hour-iop-monitoring
Enabnit, A. (2023, July 10). Applanation Tonometry: Procedure and Uses. DoveMed. Retrieved January 29, 2024, from https://www.dovemed.com/health-topics/focused-health-topics/applanation-tonometry-procedure-and-uses
Farhood, Q. K. (2012, December 27). Comparative evaluation of intraocular pressure with an air-puff tonometer versus a Goldmann applanation tonometer. NIH. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3534293/
Goel, M. (2010, September 3). Aqueous Humor Dynamics: A Review - PMC. NCBI. Retrieved January 30, 2024, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3032230/
Hg, I., Hashimoto, M., & Hung, J.-H. (2021, November 4). Description. EyeKnow. Retrieved December 13, 2023, from https://2020.igem.org/Team:NCKU_Tainan/Description
Jonas, J. B. (2018, May 17). Intraocular pressure and its normal range adjusted for ocular and systemic parameters. The Beijing Eye Study 2011. NCBI. Retrieved January 30, 2024, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5957383/
Kalayoglu, M. V. (2007, November 20). 180 Years of Evolution of the Tonometer. OphthalmologyWeb. Retrieved January 29, 2024, from https://www.ophthalmologyweb.com/Tech-Spotlights/26468-180-Years-of-Evolution-of-the-Tonometer/
Kaleem, M. (n.d.). Glaucoma. Johns Hopkins Medicine. https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/glaucoma
Kendall, J., & Faragher, J. (2007, October 10). Ultrasound-guided central venous access: A homemade phantom for simulation. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5909055_Ultrasound-guided_central_venous_access_A_homemade_phantom_for_simulation
Lee, H., Jeong, E., Sung, J., Choi, B., & Jeong, J. (2021, March 7). An Intraocular Pressure Measurement Technique Based on Acoustic Radiation Force Using an Ultrasound Transducer: A Feasibility Study. NIH. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7961774/
Martínez, J. (2022, October 3). Tonometry Technology Growing in Leaps and Rebounds. The Ophthalmologist. https://theophthalmologist.com/business-profession/dr-martinez-de-la-casa-on-his-use-of-icare-rebound-tonometers
National Glaucoma Research. (2021, July 14). Glaucoma: Facts & Figures. BrightFocus. https://www.brightfocus.org/glaucoma/article/glaucoma-facts-figures
Palko, J., & Realini, T. (2023, November 5). Chapter 9 - The role of circadian and extrinsic intraocular pressure fluctuations. ScienceDirect. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780323884426000236
Ruberto, C., Stefano, A., & Comelli, A. (2022, October 8). Using an Ultrasound Tissue Phantom Model for Hybrid Training of Deep Learning Models for Shrapnel Detection. NIH. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9604600/
Salvetat, M., Zeppieri, M., Miani, F., Tosoni, C., Parisi, L., & Brusini, P. (2011, May 25). Comparison of iCare tonometer and Goldmann applanation tonometry in normal corneas and in eyes with automated lamellar and penetrating keratoplasty. NIH. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3171271/
Susanna, R., Moraes, C., Cioffi, G., & Ritch, R. (2015, March 9). Why Do People (Still) Go Blind from Glaucoma? NIH. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4354096/
Usgaonkar, U., Naik, R., & Shetty, A. (2023, November 5). The economic burden of glaucoma on patients. Indian Journal of Ophthalmology. https://journals.lww.com/ijo/fulltext/2023/02000/the_economic_burden_of_glaucoma_on_patients.50.aspx
Zeppieri, M., & Gurnani, B. (2023, June 11). Applanation Tonometry. NIH. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK582132/
Zhang, J., Zhang, Y., & Li, Y. (2017, May 31). Correlation of IOP with Corneal Acoustic Impedance in Porcine Eye Model. BioMed Research International. https://www.hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2017/2959717/