Robert J Courtney1, Jedediah I McClintic, Justis P Ehlers. 1. *Department of Ophthalmology, Vitreoretinal Service, Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio; and †Ophthalmic Imaging Center, Cole Eye Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare various spectral domain optical coherence tomography scan patterns and review strategies to identify an optimal imaging workflow for neovascular age-related macular degeneration. METHODS: A retrospective consecutive case series was performed in eyes after anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration with concurrent spectral domain optical coherence tomography imaging (Zeiss Cirrus), including horizontal/vertical five-line rasters, and macular cube analysis. For each scan pattern, a single report was independently reviewed in a masked fashion within the clinical image review software, whereas the cube was reviewed line-by-line in the reader software for the presence of fluid. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-six reports and 39 cube scans of 39 patients were included. Among all spectral domain optical coherence tomography scans, 64% (25/39) had definitive fluid and 95% (37/39) had possible fluid. Sensitivities for definite fluid detection for horizontal, combined horizontal/vertical, and horizontal/vertical/map reviews were 68%, 76%, and 88%, respectively. When assessing for possible fluid, sensitivities for the detection for horizontal, combined horizontal/vertical, and horizontal/vertical/map reviews were 76%, 92%, and 97%, respectively. Line-by-line review of the cube scan had a sensitivity for definite and possible fluid detection of 96% and 86%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Optimizing both clinical accuracy and workflow are important factors in managing neovascular age-related macular degeneration. A zero-tolerance strategy with vertical/horizontal raster scans and thickness maps was comparable with line-by-line review of the cube to detect possible fluid.
PURPOSE: To compare various spectral domain optical coherence tomography scan patterns and review strategies to identify an optimal imaging workflow for neovascular age-related macular degeneration. METHODS: A retrospective consecutive case series was performed in eyes after anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy for neovascular age-related macular degeneration with concurrent spectral domain optical coherence tomography imaging (Zeiss Cirrus), including horizontal/vertical five-line rasters, and macular cube analysis. For each scan pattern, a single report was independently reviewed in a masked fashion within the clinical image review software, whereas the cube was reviewed line-by-line in the reader software for the presence of fluid. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-six reports and 39 cube scans of 39 patients were included. Among all spectral domain optical coherence tomography scans, 64% (25/39) had definitive fluid and 95% (37/39) had possible fluid. Sensitivities for definite fluid detection for horizontal, combined horizontal/vertical, and horizontal/vertical/map reviews were 68%, 76%, and 88%, respectively. When assessing for possible fluid, sensitivities for the detection for horizontal, combined horizontal/vertical, and horizontal/vertical/map reviews were 76%, 92%, and 97%, respectively. Line-by-line review of the cube scan had a sensitivity for definite and possible fluid detection of 96% and 86%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Optimizing both clinical accuracy and workflow are important factors in managing neovascular age-related macular degeneration. A zero-tolerance strategy with vertical/horizontal raster scans and thickness maps was comparable with line-by-line review of the cube to detect possible fluid.
Authors: D Huang; E A Swanson; C P Lin; J S Schuman; W G Stinson; W Chang; M R Hee; T Flotte; K Gregory; C A Puliafito Journal: Science Date: 1991-11-22 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Jennifer E De Niro; H Richard McDonald; Robert N Johnson; J Michael Jumper; Arthur D Fu; Emmett T Cunningham; Brandon J Lujan Journal: Retina Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Andrea Giani; Cristiano Luiselli; Daniel D Esmaili; Paola Salvetti; Mario Cigada; Joan W Miller; Giovanni Staurenghi Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2011-07-29 Impact factor: 4.799
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: Philip J Rosenfeld; David M Brown; Jeffrey S Heier; David S Boyer; Peter K Kaiser; Carol Y Chung; Robert Y Kim Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-10-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Anne E Fung; Geeta A Lalwani; Philip J Rosenfeld; Sander R Dubovy; Stephan Michels; William J Feuer; Carmen A Puliafito; Janet L Davis; Harry W Flynn; Maria Esquiabro Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 5.258
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: James C Major; Charles C Wykoff; Angeline F Mariani; Eric Chen; Daniel E Croft; David M Brown Journal: Retina Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Amy S Babiuch; Mehnaz Khan; Ming Hu; Peter K Kaiser; Sunil K Srivastava; Rishi P Singh; Allison Watts; Jamie L Reese; Justis P Ehlers Journal: Ophthalmol Retina Date: 2018-06