Samir N Patel1, Michael A Klufas1, Michael C Ryan2, Karyn E Jonas1, Susan Ostmo2, Maria Ana Martinez-Castellanos3, Audina M Berrocal4, Michael F Chiang5, R V Paul Chan6. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, Casey Eye Institute at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon. 3. Asociación para Evitar la Ceguera en México, Mexico City, Mexico. 4. Department of Ophthalmology, Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, Miami, Florida. 5. Department of Ophthalmology, Casey Eye Institute at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon; Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon. 6. Department of Ophthalmology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York. Electronic address: roc9013@med.cornell.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine the usefulness of fluorescein angiography (FA) in identifying the macular center and diagnosis of zone in patients with retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). DESIGN: Validity and reliability analysis of diagnostic tools. METHODS: Thirty-two sets (16 color fundus photographs and 16 color fundus photographs paired with the corresponding FA images) of wide-angle retinal images obtained from 16 eyes of 8 infants with ROP were compiled on a secure web site. Nine ROP experts (3 pediatric ophthalmologists and 6 vitreoretinal surgeons) participated in the study. For each image set, experts identified the macular center and provided a diagnosis of zone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Sensitivity and specificity of zone diagnosis and (2) computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone, based on precise measurement of the macular center, optic disc center, and peripheral ROP. RESULTS: Computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone agreed with the expert's diagnosis of zone in 28 (62%) of 45 cases using color fundus photographs and in 31 (69%) of 45 cases using FA images. Mean (95% confidence interval) sensitivity for detection of zone I by experts compared with a consensus reference standard diagnosis when interpreting the color fundus images alone versus interpreting the color fundus photographs and FA images was 47% (range, 35.3% to 59.3%) and 61.1% (range, 48.9% to 72.4%), respectively (t(9) ≥ (2.063); P = .073). CONCLUSIONS: There is a marginally significant difference in zone diagnosis when using color fundus photographs compared with using color fundus photographs and the corresponding FA images. There is inconsistency between traditional zone diagnosis (based on ophthalmoscopic examination and image review) compared with a computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone.
PURPOSE: To examine the usefulness of fluorescein angiography (FA) in identifying the macular center and diagnosis of zone in patients with retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). DESIGN: Validity and reliability analysis of diagnostic tools. METHODS: Thirty-two sets (16 color fundus photographs and 16 color fundus photographs paired with the corresponding FA images) of wide-angle retinal images obtained from 16 eyes of 8 infants with ROP were compiled on a secure web site. Nine ROP experts (3 pediatric ophthalmologists and 6 vitreoretinal surgeons) participated in the study. For each image set, experts identified the macular center and provided a diagnosis of zone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Sensitivity and specificity of zone diagnosis and (2) computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone, based on precise measurement of the macular center, optic disc center, and peripheral ROP. RESULTS: Computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone agreed with the expert's diagnosis of zone in 28 (62%) of 45 cases using color fundus photographs and in 31 (69%) of 45 cases using FA images. Mean (95% confidence interval) sensitivity for detection of zone I by experts compared with a consensus reference standard diagnosis when interpreting the color fundus images alone versus interpreting the color fundus photographs and FA images was 47% (range, 35.3% to 59.3%) and 61.1% (range, 48.9% to 72.4%), respectively (t(9) ≥ (2.063); P = .073). CONCLUSIONS: There is a marginally significant difference in zone diagnosis when using color fundus photographs compared with using color fundus photographs and the corresponding FA images. There is inconsistency between traditional zone diagnosis (based on ophthalmoscopic examination and image review) compared with a computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone.
Authors: J A Chamberlin; N M Bressler; S B Bressler; M J Elman; R P Murphy; T P Flood; B S Hawkins; M G Maguire; S L Fine Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 1989-10 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Linda A Cernichiaro-Espinosa; Francisco J Olguin-Manriquez; Andree Henaine-Berra; Gerardo Garcia-Aguirre; Hugo Quiroz-Mercado; Maria A Martinez-Castellanos Journal: Int Ophthalmol Date: 2016-01-14 Impact factor: 2.031
Authors: Xi Chen; Shwetha Mangalesh; Alexandria Dandridge; Du Tran-Viet; David K Wallace; Sharon F Freedman; Cynthia A Toth Journal: Ophthalmol Retina Date: 2018-03-21
Authors: J Peter Campbell; Michael C Ryan; Emily Lore; Peng Tian; Susan Ostmo; Karyn Jonas; R V Paul Chan; Michael F Chiang Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2016-05-27 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Andreas Stahl; Marie-Christine Bründer; Wolf A Lagrèze; Fanni E Molnár; Teresa Barth; Nicole Eter; Rainer Guthoff; Tim U Krohne; Johanna M Pfeil Journal: Acta Ophthalmol Date: 2021-03-19 Impact factor: 3.988