Cargando…
Optical coherence tomography angiography for the detection of macular neovascularization—comparison of en face versus cross-sectional view
PURPOSE: To evaluate sensitivity and specificity of swept source-optical coherence tomography angiography (SS-OCTA) en face images versus cross-sectional OCTA versus a combination of both for the detection of macular neovascularization (MNV). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Consecuti...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9873677/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34992250 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41433-021-01892-5 |
_version_ | 1784877649246552064 |
---|---|
author | Siggel, Robert Spital, Christel Lentzsch, Anna Liakopoulos, Sandra |
author_facet | Siggel, Robert Spital, Christel Lentzsch, Anna Liakopoulos, Sandra |
author_sort | Siggel, Robert |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To evaluate sensitivity and specificity of swept source-optical coherence tomography angiography (SS-OCTA) en face images versus cross-sectional OCTA versus a combination of both for the detection of macular neovascularization (MNV). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive patients with various chorioretinal diseases and subretinal hyperreflective material (SHRM) and/or pigment epithelial detachment (PED) on OCT possibly corresponding to MNV in at least one eye. METHODS: 102 eyes of 63 patients with fluorescein angiography (FA), OCT and SS-OCTA performed on the same day were included. FA images, the outer retina to choriocapillaris (ORCC) OCTA en face slab, a manually modified en face slab (‘custom slab’), cross-sectional OCTA and a combination of OCTA en face and cross-section were evaluated for presence of MNV. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity and specificity for MNV detection, as well as the concordance was calculated using FA as the reference. RESULTS: OCTA en face imaging alone yielded a sensitivity of 46.3% (automated)/78.1% (custom) and specificity of 93.4% (automated)/88.5% (custom) for MNV detection. Cross-sectional OCTA (combination with en face) resulted in a sensitivity of 85.4% (82.9%) and specificity of 82.0% (85.3%). Concordance to FA was moderate for automated en face OCTA (κ = 0.43), and substantial for custom en face OCTA (κ = 0.67), cross-sectional OCTA (κ = 0.66) and the combination (κ = 0.68). CONCLUSION: Segmentation errors result in decreased sensitivity for MNV detection on automatically generated OCTA en face images. Cross-sectional OCTA allows detection of MNV without manual modification of segmentation lines and should be used for evaluation of MNV on OCTA. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9873677 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98736772023-01-26 Optical coherence tomography angiography for the detection of macular neovascularization—comparison of en face versus cross-sectional view Siggel, Robert Spital, Christel Lentzsch, Anna Liakopoulos, Sandra Eye (Lond) Article PURPOSE: To evaluate sensitivity and specificity of swept source-optical coherence tomography angiography (SS-OCTA) en face images versus cross-sectional OCTA versus a combination of both for the detection of macular neovascularization (MNV). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive patients with various chorioretinal diseases and subretinal hyperreflective material (SHRM) and/or pigment epithelial detachment (PED) on OCT possibly corresponding to MNV in at least one eye. METHODS: 102 eyes of 63 patients with fluorescein angiography (FA), OCT and SS-OCTA performed on the same day were included. FA images, the outer retina to choriocapillaris (ORCC) OCTA en face slab, a manually modified en face slab (‘custom slab’), cross-sectional OCTA and a combination of OCTA en face and cross-section were evaluated for presence of MNV. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity and specificity for MNV detection, as well as the concordance was calculated using FA as the reference. RESULTS: OCTA en face imaging alone yielded a sensitivity of 46.3% (automated)/78.1% (custom) and specificity of 93.4% (automated)/88.5% (custom) for MNV detection. Cross-sectional OCTA (combination with en face) resulted in a sensitivity of 85.4% (82.9%) and specificity of 82.0% (85.3%). Concordance to FA was moderate for automated en face OCTA (κ = 0.43), and substantial for custom en face OCTA (κ = 0.67), cross-sectional OCTA (κ = 0.66) and the combination (κ = 0.68). CONCLUSION: Segmentation errors result in decreased sensitivity for MNV detection on automatically generated OCTA en face images. Cross-sectional OCTA allows detection of MNV without manual modification of segmentation lines and should be used for evaluation of MNV on OCTA. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-01-06 2023-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9873677/ /pubmed/34992250 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41433-021-01892-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This 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 license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license 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 license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Siggel, Robert Spital, Christel Lentzsch, Anna Liakopoulos, Sandra Optical coherence tomography angiography for the detection of macular neovascularization—comparison of en face versus cross-sectional view |
title | Optical coherence tomography angiography for the detection of macular neovascularization—comparison of en face versus cross-sectional view |
title_full | Optical coherence tomography angiography for the detection of macular neovascularization—comparison of en face versus cross-sectional view |
title_fullStr | Optical coherence tomography angiography for the detection of macular neovascularization—comparison of en face versus cross-sectional view |
title_full_unstemmed | Optical coherence tomography angiography for the detection of macular neovascularization—comparison of en face versus cross-sectional view |
title_short | Optical coherence tomography angiography for the detection of macular neovascularization—comparison of en face versus cross-sectional view |
title_sort | optical coherence tomography angiography for the detection of macular neovascularization—comparison of en face versus cross-sectional view |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9873677/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34992250 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41433-021-01892-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT siggelrobert opticalcoherencetomographyangiographyforthedetectionofmacularneovascularizationcomparisonofenfaceversuscrosssectionalview AT spitalchristel opticalcoherencetomographyangiographyforthedetectionofmacularneovascularizationcomparisonofenfaceversuscrosssectionalview AT lentzschanna opticalcoherencetomographyangiographyforthedetectionofmacularneovascularizationcomparisonofenfaceversuscrosssectionalview AT liakopoulossandra opticalcoherencetomographyangiographyforthedetectionofmacularneovascularizationcomparisonofenfaceversuscrosssectionalview |