Automatic detection of diabetic foot complications with infrared thermography by asymmetric analysis

Early identification of diabetic foot complications and their precursors is essential in preventing their devastating consequences, such as foot infection and amputation. Frequent, automatic risk assessment by an intelligent telemedicine system might be feasible and cost effective. Infrared thermography is a promising modality for such a system. The temperature differences between corresponding areas on contralateral feet are the clinically significant parameters. This asymmetric analysis is hindered by (1) foot segmentation errors, especially when the foot temperature and the ambient temperature are comparable, and by (2) different shapes and sizes between contralateral feet due to deformities or minor amputations. To circumvent the first problem, we used a color image and a thermal image acquired synchronously. Foot regions, detected in the color image, were rigidly registered to the thermal image. This resulted in 97.8% ± 1.1% sensitivity and 98.4% ± 0.5% specificity over 76 high-risk diabetic patients with manual annotation as a reference. Nonrigid landmark-based registration with Bsplines solved the second problem. Corresponding points in the two feet could be found regardless of the shapes and sizes of the feet. With that, the temperature difference of the left and right feet could be obtained.

Assessment of signs of foot infection in diabetes patients using photographic foot imaging and infrared thermography

Background Patients with diabetic foot disease require frequent screening to prevent complications and may be helped through telemedical home monitoring. Within this context, the goal was to determine the validity and reliability of assessing diabetic foot infection using photographic foot imaging and infrared thermography. Subjects and Methods For 38 patients with diabetes who presented with a foot infection or were admitted to the hospital with a foot-related complication, photographs of the plantar foot surface using a photographic imaging device and temperature data from six plantar regions using an infrared thermometer were obtained. A temperature difference between feet of > 2.2 °C defined a ''hotspot.'' Two independent observers assessed each foot for presence of foot infection, both live (using the Perfusion-Extent-Depth- Infection-Sensation classification) and from photographs 2 and 4 weeks later (for presence of erythema and ulcers). Agreement in diagnosis between live assessment and (the combination of ) photographic assessment and temperature recordings was calculated. Results Diagnosis of infection from photographs was specific (> 85%) but not very sensitive (< 60%). Diagnosis based on hotspots present was sensitive (> 90%) but not very specific (<25%). Diagnosis based on the combination of photographic and temperature assessments was both sensitive (> 60%) and specific (> 79%). Intra-observer agreement between photographic assessments was good (Cohen's j = 0.77 and 0.52 for both observers). Conclusions Diagnosis of foot infection in patients with diabetes seems valid and reliable using photographic imaging in combination with infrared thermography. This supports the intended use of these modalities for the home monitoring of high-risk patients with diabetes to facilitate early diagnosis of signs of foot infection.