PURPOSE: To describe a technique to obtain combined images of vitreoretinal and choroidal structures using spectral-domain (SD) optical coherence tomography (OCT) and to evaluate applicability in normal eyes and limitations in eyes with cataract. DESIGN: Prospective, observational case series. METHODS: Three different foveal scans, including conventional SD OCT, enhanced depth imaging OCT and the novel method called combined depth imaging (CDI) OCT, were obtained in 42 eyes of healthy volunteers and in 26 eyes with cataract using the Heidelberg Spectralis HRA (Heidelberg Engineering). The CDI OCT images were obtained manually using an image modification process that enhances the vitreoretinal interface first and then the choroid, while averaging 100 separate OCT scans. The visualization of the inner border of the preretinal pocket and the outer border of the choroid was graded by independent masked observers for each OCT scan method. RESULTS: The CDI technique was able to create a good-quality combined image of the posterior structures in all the eyes, including eyes with cataract. The agreement between the grading performed by the independent observers was high for both the inner border of the vitreal pocket (κ, 0.86; P < .001) and the outer choroidal border (κ, 0.90; P < .001). CDI OCT was equivalent to conventional SD OCT in visualizing the vitreal pocket (P = .445 for normal eyes, P = .162 for eyes with cataract) and was equivalent to enhanced depth imaging OCT in visualizing the outer choroidal border (P = .660 for normal eyes, P = .329 for eyes with cataract). CDI OCT was superior to conventional SD OCT and enhanced depth imaging OCT in visualizing both of the structures (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The manual technique of CDI OCT is highly sensitive to visualize posterior vitreoretinal and choroidal structures into a single full-depth image and is not affected by mild to moderate cataract.
PURPOSE: To describe a technique to obtain combined images of vitreoretinal and choroidal structures using spectral-domain (SD) optical coherence tomography (OCT) and to evaluate applicability in normal eyes and limitations in eyes with cataract. DESIGN: Prospective, observational case series. METHODS: Three different foveal scans, including conventional SD OCT, enhanced depth imaging OCT and the novel method called combined depth imaging (CDI) OCT, were obtained in 42 eyes of healthy volunteers and in 26 eyes with cataract using the Heidelberg Spectralis HRA (Heidelberg Engineering). The CDI OCT images were obtained manually using an image modification process that enhances the vitreoretinal interface first and then the choroid, while averaging 100 separate OCT scans. The visualization of the inner border of the preretinal pocket and the outer border of the choroid was graded by independent masked observers for each OCT scan method. RESULTS: The CDI technique was able to create a good-quality combined image of the posterior structures in all the eyes, including eyes with cataract. The agreement between the grading performed by the independent observers was high for both the inner border of the vitreal pocket (κ, 0.86; P < .001) and the outer choroidal border (κ, 0.90; P < .001). CDI OCT was equivalent to conventional SD OCT in visualizing the vitreal pocket (P = .445 for normal eyes, P = .162 for eyes with cataract) and was equivalent to enhanced depth imaging OCT in visualizing the outer choroidal border (P = .660 for normal eyes, P = .329 for eyes with cataract). CDI OCT was superior to conventional SD OCT and enhanced depth imaging OCT in visualizing both of the structures (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The manual technique of CDI OCT is highly sensitive to visualize posterior vitreoretinal and choroidal structures into a single full-depth image and is not affected by mild to moderate cataract.
Authors: Maciej Wojtkowski; Vivek Srinivasan; Tony Ko; James Fujimoto; Andrzej Kowalczyk; Jay Duker Journal: Opt Express Date: 2004-05-31 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: David M Brown; Peter K Kaiser; Mark Michels; Gisele Soubrane; Jeffrey S Heier; Robert Y Kim; Judy P Sy; Susan Schneider Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-10-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Je Hyun Seo; Young Suk Yu; Jeong Hun Kim; Ho Kyung Choung; Jang Won Heo; Seong-Joon Kim Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2007-03-06 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Daniel F Martin; Maureen G Maguire; Gui-shuang Ying; Juan E Grunwald; Stuart L Fine; Glenn J Jaffe Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-04-28 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Giulio Barteselli; Dirk-Uwe Bartsch; Francesco Viola; Francesca Mojana; Marco Pellegrini; Kathrin I Hartmann; Eleonora Benatti; Simon Leicht; Roberto Ratiglia; Giovanni Staurenghi; Robert N Weinreb; William R Freeman Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2013-06-13 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Giulio Barteselli; Dirk-Uwe Bartsch; Robert N Weinreb; Natalia Camacho; Joseph T Nezgoda; Amir H Marvasti; William R Freeman Journal: Retina Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Jonathan J Liu; Andre J Witkin; Mehreen Adhi; Ireneusz Grulkowski; Martin F Kraus; Al-Hafeez Dhalla; Chen D Lu; Joachim Hornegger; Jay S Duker; James G Fujimoto Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-07-18 Impact factor: 3.240