Cargando…

Comparison of Methods for Estimating Retinal Shape: Peripheral Refraction vs. Optical Coherence Tomography

Retinal shape presents a clinical parameter of interest for myopia, and has commonly been inferred indirectly from peripheral refraction (PRX) profiles. Distortion-corrected optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans offer a new and direct possibility for retinal shape estimation. The current study co...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Breher, Katharina, Calabuig, Alejandro, Kühlewein, Laura, Ziemssen, Focke, Ohlendorf, Arne, Wahl, Siegfried
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7825350/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33419003
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10020174
_version_ 1783640287685378048
author Breher, Katharina
Calabuig, Alejandro
Kühlewein, Laura
Ziemssen, Focke
Ohlendorf, Arne
Wahl, Siegfried
author_facet Breher, Katharina
Calabuig, Alejandro
Kühlewein, Laura
Ziemssen, Focke
Ohlendorf, Arne
Wahl, Siegfried
author_sort Breher, Katharina
collection PubMed
description Retinal shape presents a clinical parameter of interest for myopia, and has commonly been inferred indirectly from peripheral refraction (PRX) profiles. Distortion-corrected optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans offer a new and direct possibility for retinal shape estimation. The current study compared retinal curvatures derived from OCT scans vs. PRX measurements in three refractive profiles (0 [Formula: see text] and 90 [Formula: see text] meridians, plus spherical equivalent) for 25 participants via Bland–Altman analysis. The radial differences between both procedures were correlated to axial length using Pearson correlation. In general, PRX- and OCT-based retinal radii showed low correlation (all intraclass correlation coefficients < 0.21). PRX found flatter retinal curvatures compared to OCT, with the highest absolute agreement found with the 90 [Formula: see text] meridian (mean difference +0.08 mm) and lowest in the 0 [Formula: see text] meridian (mean difference +0.89 mm). Moreover, a negative relation between axial length and the agreement of both methods was detected especially in the 90 [Formula: see text] meridian (R = −0.38, p = 0.06). PRX measurements tend to underestimate the retinal radius with increasing myopia when compared to OCT measurements. Therefore, future conclusions from PRX on retinal shape should be made cautiously. Rather, faster and more clinically feasible OCT imaging should be performed for this purpose.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7825350
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78253502021-01-24 Comparison of Methods for Estimating Retinal Shape: Peripheral Refraction vs. Optical Coherence Tomography Breher, Katharina Calabuig, Alejandro Kühlewein, Laura Ziemssen, Focke Ohlendorf, Arne Wahl, Siegfried J Clin Med Article Retinal shape presents a clinical parameter of interest for myopia, and has commonly been inferred indirectly from peripheral refraction (PRX) profiles. Distortion-corrected optical coherence tomography (OCT) scans offer a new and direct possibility for retinal shape estimation. The current study compared retinal curvatures derived from OCT scans vs. PRX measurements in three refractive profiles (0 [Formula: see text] and 90 [Formula: see text] meridians, plus spherical equivalent) for 25 participants via Bland–Altman analysis. The radial differences between both procedures were correlated to axial length using Pearson correlation. In general, PRX- and OCT-based retinal radii showed low correlation (all intraclass correlation coefficients < 0.21). PRX found flatter retinal curvatures compared to OCT, with the highest absolute agreement found with the 90 [Formula: see text] meridian (mean difference +0.08 mm) and lowest in the 0 [Formula: see text] meridian (mean difference +0.89 mm). Moreover, a negative relation between axial length and the agreement of both methods was detected especially in the 90 [Formula: see text] meridian (R = −0.38, p = 0.06). PRX measurements tend to underestimate the retinal radius with increasing myopia when compared to OCT measurements. Therefore, future conclusions from PRX on retinal shape should be made cautiously. Rather, faster and more clinically feasible OCT imaging should be performed for this purpose. MDPI 2021-01-06 /pmc/articles/PMC7825350/ /pubmed/33419003 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10020174 Text en © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Breher, Katharina
Calabuig, Alejandro
Kühlewein, Laura
Ziemssen, Focke
Ohlendorf, Arne
Wahl, Siegfried
Comparison of Methods for Estimating Retinal Shape: Peripheral Refraction vs. Optical Coherence Tomography
title Comparison of Methods for Estimating Retinal Shape: Peripheral Refraction vs. Optical Coherence Tomography
title_full Comparison of Methods for Estimating Retinal Shape: Peripheral Refraction vs. Optical Coherence Tomography
title_fullStr Comparison of Methods for Estimating Retinal Shape: Peripheral Refraction vs. Optical Coherence Tomography
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Methods for Estimating Retinal Shape: Peripheral Refraction vs. Optical Coherence Tomography
title_short Comparison of Methods for Estimating Retinal Shape: Peripheral Refraction vs. Optical Coherence Tomography
title_sort comparison of methods for estimating retinal shape: peripheral refraction vs. optical coherence tomography
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7825350/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33419003
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10020174
work_keys_str_mv AT breherkatharina comparisonofmethodsforestimatingretinalshapeperipheralrefractionvsopticalcoherencetomography
AT calabuigalejandro comparisonofmethodsforestimatingretinalshapeperipheralrefractionvsopticalcoherencetomography
AT kuhleweinlaura comparisonofmethodsforestimatingretinalshapeperipheralrefractionvsopticalcoherencetomography
AT ziemssenfocke comparisonofmethodsforestimatingretinalshapeperipheralrefractionvsopticalcoherencetomography
AT ohlendorfarne comparisonofmethodsforestimatingretinalshapeperipheralrefractionvsopticalcoherencetomography
AT wahlsiegfried comparisonofmethodsforestimatingretinalshapeperipheralrefractionvsopticalcoherencetomography