PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical utility of ultra-widefield imaging as an adjunctive tool in the diagnosis, management, and follow-up of eyes with non-traumatic rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of patients with a rhegmatogenous retinal detachment who received ultra-widefield imaging with the Optos® Optomap® P200Tx. Comparisons were made between UWF imaging and indirect ophthalmoscopy for features of detachments, including extent of detachment, holes, retinopexy, and related pathology. RESULTS: Thirty-six eyes of 34 patients were included. Preoperatively, ultra-widefield imaging more precisely documented the extent of retinal detachments in the superior, inferior, and nasal quadrants in 13.9% of cases. Ultra-widefield imaging failed to detect retinal holes in the superior and inferior quadrants in 11.1% and 19.4% of cases, respectively. In postoperative imaging, UWF photos did not detect retinopexy which was ophthalmoscopy-visible both superiorly and inferiorly in 19.4% of cases. The mean differences in clock hours of the detachments as documented on the clinical exam compared to ultra-widefield imaging in the superior, inferior, temporal, and nasal quadrants were -0.18 ± 0.84, 0.41 ± 1.16, 0.08 ± 1.08, and -0.13 ± 2.25 hours, respectively. CONCLUSION: Ultra-widefield imaging is a useful adjunct for documentation of rhegmatogenous retinal detachments and their postoperative repair. However, detection of retinal holes, tears, and postoperative scarring is poor, especially in the inferior and superior periphery.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical utility of ultra-widefield imaging as an adjunctive tool in the diagnosis, management, and follow-up of eyes with non-traumatic rhegmatogenous retinal detachment. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of patients with a rhegmatogenous retinal detachment who received ultra-widefield imaging with the Optos® Optomap® P200Tx. Comparisons were made between UWF imaging and indirect ophthalmoscopy for features of detachments, including extent of detachment, holes, retinopexy, and related pathology. RESULTS: Thirty-six eyes of 34 patients were included. Preoperatively, ultra-widefield imaging more precisely documented the extent of retinal detachments in the superior, inferior, and nasal quadrants in 13.9% of cases. Ultra-widefield imaging failed to detect retinal holes in the superior and inferior quadrants in 11.1% and 19.4% of cases, respectively. In postoperative imaging, UWF photos did not detect retinopexy which was ophthalmoscopy-visible both superiorly and inferiorly in 19.4% of cases. The mean differences in clock hours of the detachments as documented on the clinical exam compared to ultra-widefield imaging in the superior, inferior, temporal, and nasal quadrants were -0.18 ± 0.84, 0.41 ± 1.16, 0.08 ± 1.08, and -0.13 ± 2.25 hours, respectively. CONCLUSION: Ultra-widefield imaging is a useful adjunct for documentation of rhegmatogenous retinal detachments and their postoperative repair. However, detection of retinal holes, tears, and postoperative scarring is poor, especially in the inferior and superior periphery.