Cargando…
The OSCAR-MP Consensus Criteria for Quality Assessment of Retinal Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) is a noninvasive high-resolution imaging technique for assessing the retinal vasculature and is increasingly used in various ophthalmologic, neuro-ophthalmologic, and neurologic diseases. To date, there are no validated conse...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10574825/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37813596 http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/NXI.0000000000200169 |
_version_ | 1785120779769217024 |
---|---|
author | Wicklein, Rebecca Yam, Charmaine Noll, Christina Aly, Lilian Banze, Nicolas Romahn, Eva Feodora Wolf, Elisabeth Hemmer, Bernhard Oertel, Frederike C. Zimmermann, Hanna Albrecht, Philipp Ringelstein, Marius Baumann, Carmen Feucht, Nikolaus Penkava, Josef Havla, Joachim Gernert, Jonathan A. Mardin, Christian Vasileiou, Eleni S. Van Der Walt, Anneke Al-Louzi, Omar Cabello, Sergio Vidal-Jordana, Angela Krämer, Julia Wiendl, Heinz Preiningerova, Jana Lizrova Ciccarelli, Olga Garcia-Martin, Elena Kana, Veronika Calabresi, Peter A. Paul, Friedemann Saidha, Shiv Petzold, Axel Toosy, Ahmed T. Knier, Benjamin |
author_facet | Wicklein, Rebecca Yam, Charmaine Noll, Christina Aly, Lilian Banze, Nicolas Romahn, Eva Feodora Wolf, Elisabeth Hemmer, Bernhard Oertel, Frederike C. Zimmermann, Hanna Albrecht, Philipp Ringelstein, Marius Baumann, Carmen Feucht, Nikolaus Penkava, Josef Havla, Joachim Gernert, Jonathan A. Mardin, Christian Vasileiou, Eleni S. Van Der Walt, Anneke Al-Louzi, Omar Cabello, Sergio Vidal-Jordana, Angela Krämer, Julia Wiendl, Heinz Preiningerova, Jana Lizrova Ciccarelli, Olga Garcia-Martin, Elena Kana, Veronika Calabresi, Peter A. Paul, Friedemann Saidha, Shiv Petzold, Axel Toosy, Ahmed T. Knier, Benjamin |
author_sort | Wicklein, Rebecca |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) is a noninvasive high-resolution imaging technique for assessing the retinal vasculature and is increasingly used in various ophthalmologic, neuro-ophthalmologic, and neurologic diseases. To date, there are no validated consensus criteria for quality control (QC) of OCTA. Our study aimed to develop criteria for OCTA quality assessment. METHODS: To establish criteria through (1) extensive literature review on OCTA artifacts and image quality to generate standardized and easy-to-apply OCTA QC criteria, (2) application of OCTA QC criteria to evaluate interrater agreement, (3) identification of reasons for interrater disagreement, revision of OCTA QC criteria, development of OCTA QC scoring guide and training set, and (4) validation of QC criteria in an international, interdisciplinary multicenter study. RESULTS: We identified 7 major aspects that affect OCTA quality: (O) obvious problems, (S) signal strength, (C) centration, (A) algorithm failure, (R) retinal pathology, (M) motion artifacts, and (P) projection artifacts. Seven independent raters applied the OSCAR-MP criteria to a set of 40 OCTA scans from people with MS, Sjogren syndrome, and uveitis and healthy individuals. The interrater kappa was substantial (κ 0.67). Projection artifacts were the main reason for interrater disagreement. Because artifacts can affect only parts of OCTA images, we agreed that prior definition of a specific region of interest (ROI) is crucial for subsequent OCTA quality assessment. To enhance artifact recognition and interrater agreement on reduced image quality, we designed a scoring guide and OCTA training set. Using these educational tools, 23 raters from 14 different centers reached an almost perfect agreement (κ 0.92) for the rejection of poor-quality OCTA images using the OSCAR-MP criteria. DISCUSSION: We propose a 3-step approach for standardized quality control: (1) To define a specific ROI, (2) to assess the occurrence of OCTA artifacts according to the OSCAR-MP criteria, and (3) to evaluate OCTA quality based on the occurrence of different artifacts within the ROI. OSCAR-MP OCTA QC criteria achieved high interrater agreement in an international multicenter study and is a promising QC protocol for application in the context of future clinical trials and studies. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10574825 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105748252023-10-14 The OSCAR-MP Consensus Criteria for Quality Assessment of Retinal Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography Wicklein, Rebecca Yam, Charmaine Noll, Christina Aly, Lilian Banze, Nicolas Romahn, Eva Feodora Wolf, Elisabeth Hemmer, Bernhard Oertel, Frederike C. Zimmermann, Hanna Albrecht, Philipp Ringelstein, Marius Baumann, Carmen Feucht, Nikolaus Penkava, Josef Havla, Joachim Gernert, Jonathan A. Mardin, Christian Vasileiou, Eleni S. Van Der Walt, Anneke Al-Louzi, Omar Cabello, Sergio Vidal-Jordana, Angela Krämer, Julia Wiendl, Heinz Preiningerova, Jana Lizrova Ciccarelli, Olga Garcia-Martin, Elena Kana, Veronika Calabresi, Peter A. Paul, Friedemann Saidha, Shiv Petzold, Axel Toosy, Ahmed T. Knier, Benjamin Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm Research Article BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) is a noninvasive high-resolution imaging technique for assessing the retinal vasculature and is increasingly used in various ophthalmologic, neuro-ophthalmologic, and neurologic diseases. To date, there are no validated consensus criteria for quality control (QC) of OCTA. Our study aimed to develop criteria for OCTA quality assessment. METHODS: To establish criteria through (1) extensive literature review on OCTA artifacts and image quality to generate standardized and easy-to-apply OCTA QC criteria, (2) application of OCTA QC criteria to evaluate interrater agreement, (3) identification of reasons for interrater disagreement, revision of OCTA QC criteria, development of OCTA QC scoring guide and training set, and (4) validation of QC criteria in an international, interdisciplinary multicenter study. RESULTS: We identified 7 major aspects that affect OCTA quality: (O) obvious problems, (S) signal strength, (C) centration, (A) algorithm failure, (R) retinal pathology, (M) motion artifacts, and (P) projection artifacts. Seven independent raters applied the OSCAR-MP criteria to a set of 40 OCTA scans from people with MS, Sjogren syndrome, and uveitis and healthy individuals. The interrater kappa was substantial (κ 0.67). Projection artifacts were the main reason for interrater disagreement. Because artifacts can affect only parts of OCTA images, we agreed that prior definition of a specific region of interest (ROI) is crucial for subsequent OCTA quality assessment. To enhance artifact recognition and interrater agreement on reduced image quality, we designed a scoring guide and OCTA training set. Using these educational tools, 23 raters from 14 different centers reached an almost perfect agreement (κ 0.92) for the rejection of poor-quality OCTA images using the OSCAR-MP criteria. DISCUSSION: We propose a 3-step approach for standardized quality control: (1) To define a specific ROI, (2) to assess the occurrence of OCTA artifacts according to the OSCAR-MP criteria, and (3) to evaluate OCTA quality based on the occurrence of different artifacts within the ROI. OSCAR-MP OCTA QC criteria achieved high interrater agreement in an international multicenter study and is a promising QC protocol for application in the context of future clinical trials and studies. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2023-10-09 /pmc/articles/PMC10574825/ /pubmed/37813596 http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/NXI.0000000000200169 Text en Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , which permits downloading and sharing the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Wicklein, Rebecca Yam, Charmaine Noll, Christina Aly, Lilian Banze, Nicolas Romahn, Eva Feodora Wolf, Elisabeth Hemmer, Bernhard Oertel, Frederike C. Zimmermann, Hanna Albrecht, Philipp Ringelstein, Marius Baumann, Carmen Feucht, Nikolaus Penkava, Josef Havla, Joachim Gernert, Jonathan A. Mardin, Christian Vasileiou, Eleni S. Van Der Walt, Anneke Al-Louzi, Omar Cabello, Sergio Vidal-Jordana, Angela Krämer, Julia Wiendl, Heinz Preiningerova, Jana Lizrova Ciccarelli, Olga Garcia-Martin, Elena Kana, Veronika Calabresi, Peter A. Paul, Friedemann Saidha, Shiv Petzold, Axel Toosy, Ahmed T. Knier, Benjamin The OSCAR-MP Consensus Criteria for Quality Assessment of Retinal Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography |
title | The OSCAR-MP Consensus Criteria for Quality Assessment of Retinal Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography |
title_full | The OSCAR-MP Consensus Criteria for Quality Assessment of Retinal Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography |
title_fullStr | The OSCAR-MP Consensus Criteria for Quality Assessment of Retinal Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography |
title_full_unstemmed | The OSCAR-MP Consensus Criteria for Quality Assessment of Retinal Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography |
title_short | The OSCAR-MP Consensus Criteria for Quality Assessment of Retinal Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography |
title_sort | oscar-mp consensus criteria for quality assessment of retinal optical coherence tomography angiography |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10574825/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37813596 http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/NXI.0000000000200169 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wickleinrebecca theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT yamcharmaine theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT nollchristina theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT alylilian theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT banzenicolas theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT romahnevafeodora theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT wolfelisabeth theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT hemmerbernhard theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT oertelfrederikec theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT zimmermannhanna theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT albrechtphilipp theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT ringelsteinmarius theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT baumanncarmen theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT feuchtnikolaus theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT penkavajosef theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT havlajoachim theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT gernertjonathana theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT mardinchristian theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT vasileiouelenis theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT vanderwaltanneke theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT allouziomar theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT cabellosergio theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT vidaljordanaangela theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT kramerjulia theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT wiendlheinz theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT preiningerovajanalizrova theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT ciccarelliolga theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT garciamartinelena theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT kanaveronika theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT calabresipetera theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT paulfriedemann theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT saidhashiv theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT petzoldaxel theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT toosyahmedt theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT knierbenjamin theoscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT wickleinrebecca oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT yamcharmaine oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT nollchristina oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT alylilian oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT banzenicolas oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT romahnevafeodora oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT wolfelisabeth oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT hemmerbernhard oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT oertelfrederikec oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT zimmermannhanna oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT albrechtphilipp oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT ringelsteinmarius oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT baumanncarmen oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT feuchtnikolaus oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT penkavajosef oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT havlajoachim oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT gernertjonathana oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT mardinchristian oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT vasileiouelenis oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT vanderwaltanneke oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT allouziomar oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT cabellosergio oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT vidaljordanaangela oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT kramerjulia oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT wiendlheinz oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT preiningerovajanalizrova oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT ciccarelliolga oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT garciamartinelena oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT kanaveronika oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT calabresipetera oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT paulfriedemann oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT saidhashiv oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT petzoldaxel oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT toosyahmedt oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography AT knierbenjamin oscarmpconsensuscriteriaforqualityassessmentofretinalopticalcoherencetomographyangiography |