PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety of oral fluorescein angiography (FA) and to compare its efficacy in detection of macular edema (ME) with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). METHODS: Results of imaging studies for 1,928 eyes of 1,019 patients who had simultaneously undergone both oral FA and SD-OCT by a confocal laser ophthalmoscope were reviewed. Sensitivity in detecting ME, discrepancy rate, and "kappa" agreement were determined for both the techniques and with eyes stratified by disease diagnosis. RESULTS: No allergic reactions occurred after oral FA. Mild gastric discomfort was noted in <1% of the patients; 1,840 eyes (95.4%) showed concordance between the two techniques, and kappa agreement was 90.3%. For ME, oral FA showed an overall sensitivity of 0.97 and SD-OCT of 0.91. Equivalent sensitivity was found in cases of wet age-related macular degeneration (0.99). Oral FA was more sensitive than SD-OCT in cases of retinovascular diseases. The SD-OCT showed higher sensitivity in cases of macular holes. Detection of ME by SD-OCT was significantly higher in cases of intense leakage on oral FA (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Oral FA proved to be a safe and an adequate technique to evaluate ME. It is more sensitive than SD-OCT in detection of ME in cases of retinovascular diseases but can fail to detect ME in cases of macular holes. A noninvasive examination with simultaneous oral FA and SD-OCT may be considered to obtain a comprehensive evaluation of the presence of ME from different pathologies.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety of oral fluorescein angiography (FA) and to compare its efficacy in detection of macular edema (ME) with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). METHODS: Results of imaging studies for 1,928 eyes of 1,019 patients who had simultaneously undergone both oral FA and SD-OCT by a confocal laser ophthalmoscope were reviewed. Sensitivity in detecting ME, discrepancy rate, and "kappa" agreement were determined for both the techniques and with eyes stratified by disease diagnosis. RESULTS: No allergic reactions occurred after oral FA. Mild gastric discomfort was noted in <1% of the patients; 1,840 eyes (95.4%) showed concordance between the two techniques, and kappa agreement was 90.3%. For ME, oral FA showed an overall sensitivity of 0.97 and SD-OCT of 0.91. Equivalent sensitivity was found in cases of wet age-related macular degeneration (0.99). Oral FA was more sensitive than SD-OCT in cases of retinovascular diseases. The SD-OCT showed higher sensitivity in cases of macular holes. Detection of ME by SD-OCT was significantly higher in cases of intense leakage on oral FA (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Oral FA proved to be a safe and an adequate technique to evaluate ME. It is more sensitive than SD-OCT in detection of ME in cases of retinovascular diseases but can fail to detect ME in cases of macular holes. A noninvasive examination with simultaneous oral FA and SD-OCT may be considered to obtain a comprehensive evaluation of the presence of ME from different pathologies.
Authors: C R Garcia; M E Rivero; D U Bartsch; S Ishiko; A Takamiya; K Fukui; H Hirokawa; T Clark; A Yoshida; W R Freeman Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 1999-06 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: K A Kwiterovich; M G Maguire; R P Murphy; A P Schachat; N M Bressler; S B Bressler; S L Fine Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 1991-07 Impact factor: 12.079