Cargando…

Ultra-wide field imaging to assess the optic nerve and retina in Boston type I and II keratoprosthesis patients

BACKGROUND: The ability to view the posterior segment in keratoprosthesis (Kpro) implanted patients is limited. The purpose of this retrospective, observational study was to investigate the use of ultra-wide field (UWF) scanning laser ophthalmoscopy imaging and its utility for serial evaluation of t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bloom, William R., Karl, Matthew D., Smith, Sarah B., Shao, Yusra F., Terrell, William, Tarabishy, Ahmad B., Hendershot, Andrew J., Kuennen, Rebecca A., Oostra, Tyler D., Mauger, Thomas F., Cebulla, Colleen M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9077933/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35526055
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40662-022-00289-z
_version_ 1784702219475484672
author Bloom, William R.
Karl, Matthew D.
Smith, Sarah B.
Shao, Yusra F.
Terrell, William
Tarabishy, Ahmad B.
Hendershot, Andrew J.
Kuennen, Rebecca A.
Oostra, Tyler D.
Mauger, Thomas F.
Cebulla, Colleen M.
author_facet Bloom, William R.
Karl, Matthew D.
Smith, Sarah B.
Shao, Yusra F.
Terrell, William
Tarabishy, Ahmad B.
Hendershot, Andrew J.
Kuennen, Rebecca A.
Oostra, Tyler D.
Mauger, Thomas F.
Cebulla, Colleen M.
author_sort Bloom, William R.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The ability to view the posterior segment in keratoprosthesis (Kpro) implanted patients is limited. The purpose of this retrospective, observational study was to investigate the use of ultra-wide field (UWF) scanning laser ophthalmoscopy imaging and its utility for serial evaluation of the retina and optic nerve in patients with either a Boston type I or II Kpro. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed for patients with a Boston type I or II Kpro seen at The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center. Images were graded for quality by two masked observers on a defined four-point scale (“Poor”, “Fair”, “Good”, or “Very good”) and assessed for visible posterior segment anatomy. Interobserver agreement was described using the Kappa statistic coefficient (κ) with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 19 eyes from 17 patients were included in this study. Eighteen eyes had a type I Kpro, while one eye had a type II Kpro. UWF imaging from 41 patient visits were reviewed by two observers. Interobserver agreement between the two graders was fair for image quality (κ = 0.36), moderate for visibility of the macula with discernible details (κ = 0.59), moderate for visibility of the anterior retina with discernable details (κ = 0.60), and perfect agreement for visibility of the optic nerve with discernible details (κ = 1.0). In 6 eyes, UWF imaging was performed longitudinally (range 3–9 individual visits), allowing for long-term follow-up (range 3–46 months) of posterior segment clinical pathology. CONCLUSIONS: UWF imaging provides adequate and reliable visualization of the posterior segment in Kpro implanted patients. This imaging modality allowed for noninvasive longitudinal monitoring of retinal and optic nerve disease in this selected patient population.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9077933
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90779332022-05-08 Ultra-wide field imaging to assess the optic nerve and retina in Boston type I and II keratoprosthesis patients Bloom, William R. Karl, Matthew D. Smith, Sarah B. Shao, Yusra F. Terrell, William Tarabishy, Ahmad B. Hendershot, Andrew J. Kuennen, Rebecca A. Oostra, Tyler D. Mauger, Thomas F. Cebulla, Colleen M. Eye Vis (Lond) Research BACKGROUND: The ability to view the posterior segment in keratoprosthesis (Kpro) implanted patients is limited. The purpose of this retrospective, observational study was to investigate the use of ultra-wide field (UWF) scanning laser ophthalmoscopy imaging and its utility for serial evaluation of the retina and optic nerve in patients with either a Boston type I or II Kpro. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed for patients with a Boston type I or II Kpro seen at The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center. Images were graded for quality by two masked observers on a defined four-point scale (“Poor”, “Fair”, “Good”, or “Very good”) and assessed for visible posterior segment anatomy. Interobserver agreement was described using the Kappa statistic coefficient (κ) with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: A total of 19 eyes from 17 patients were included in this study. Eighteen eyes had a type I Kpro, while one eye had a type II Kpro. UWF imaging from 41 patient visits were reviewed by two observers. Interobserver agreement between the two graders was fair for image quality (κ = 0.36), moderate for visibility of the macula with discernible details (κ = 0.59), moderate for visibility of the anterior retina with discernable details (κ = 0.60), and perfect agreement for visibility of the optic nerve with discernible details (κ = 1.0). In 6 eyes, UWF imaging was performed longitudinally (range 3–9 individual visits), allowing for long-term follow-up (range 3–46 months) of posterior segment clinical pathology. CONCLUSIONS: UWF imaging provides adequate and reliable visualization of the posterior segment in Kpro implanted patients. This imaging modality allowed for noninvasive longitudinal monitoring of retinal and optic nerve disease in this selected patient population. BioMed Central 2022-05-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9077933/ /pubmed/35526055 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40662-022-00289-z Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Bloom, William R.
Karl, Matthew D.
Smith, Sarah B.
Shao, Yusra F.
Terrell, William
Tarabishy, Ahmad B.
Hendershot, Andrew J.
Kuennen, Rebecca A.
Oostra, Tyler D.
Mauger, Thomas F.
Cebulla, Colleen M.
Ultra-wide field imaging to assess the optic nerve and retina in Boston type I and II keratoprosthesis patients
title Ultra-wide field imaging to assess the optic nerve and retina in Boston type I and II keratoprosthesis patients
title_full Ultra-wide field imaging to assess the optic nerve and retina in Boston type I and II keratoprosthesis patients
title_fullStr Ultra-wide field imaging to assess the optic nerve and retina in Boston type I and II keratoprosthesis patients
title_full_unstemmed Ultra-wide field imaging to assess the optic nerve and retina in Boston type I and II keratoprosthesis patients
title_short Ultra-wide field imaging to assess the optic nerve and retina in Boston type I and II keratoprosthesis patients
title_sort ultra-wide field imaging to assess the optic nerve and retina in boston type i and ii keratoprosthesis patients
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9077933/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35526055
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40662-022-00289-z
work_keys_str_mv AT bloomwilliamr ultrawidefieldimagingtoassesstheopticnerveandretinainbostontypeiandiikeratoprosthesispatients
AT karlmatthewd ultrawidefieldimagingtoassesstheopticnerveandretinainbostontypeiandiikeratoprosthesispatients
AT smithsarahb ultrawidefieldimagingtoassesstheopticnerveandretinainbostontypeiandiikeratoprosthesispatients
AT shaoyusraf ultrawidefieldimagingtoassesstheopticnerveandretinainbostontypeiandiikeratoprosthesispatients
AT terrellwilliam ultrawidefieldimagingtoassesstheopticnerveandretinainbostontypeiandiikeratoprosthesispatients
AT tarabishyahmadb ultrawidefieldimagingtoassesstheopticnerveandretinainbostontypeiandiikeratoprosthesispatients
AT hendershotandrewj ultrawidefieldimagingtoassesstheopticnerveandretinainbostontypeiandiikeratoprosthesispatients
AT kuennenrebeccaa ultrawidefieldimagingtoassesstheopticnerveandretinainbostontypeiandiikeratoprosthesispatients
AT oostratylerd ultrawidefieldimagingtoassesstheopticnerveandretinainbostontypeiandiikeratoprosthesispatients
AT maugerthomasf ultrawidefieldimagingtoassesstheopticnerveandretinainbostontypeiandiikeratoprosthesispatients
AT cebullacolleenm ultrawidefieldimagingtoassesstheopticnerveandretinainbostontypeiandiikeratoprosthesispatients