Drew Scoles1, John A Flatter, Robert F Cooper, Christopher S Langlo, Scott Robison, Maureen Neitz, David V Weinberg, Mark E Pennesi, Dennis P Han, Alfredo Dubra, Joseph Carroll. 1. *Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York; †Department of Ophthalmology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin; ‡Department of Biomedical Engineering, Marquette University, Milwaukee, Wisconsin; §Department of Cell Biology, Neurobiology, and Anatomy, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin; ¶Department of Ophthalmology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; **Casey Eye Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon; and ††Department of Biophysics, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare images of photoreceptor layer disruptions obtained with optical coherence tomography (OCT) and adaptive optics scanning light ophthalmoscopy (AOSLO) in a variety of pathologic states. METHODS: Five subjects with photoreceptor ellipsoid zone disruption as per OCT and clinical diagnoses of closed-globe blunt ocular trauma (n = 2), macular telangiectasia type 2 (n = 1), blue-cone monochromacy (n = 1), or cone-rod dystrophy (n = 1) were included. Images were acquired within and around photoreceptor lesions using spectral domain OCT, confocal AOSLO, and split-detector AOSLO. RESULTS: There were substantial differences in the extent and appearance of the photoreceptor mosaic as revealed by confocal AOSLO, split-detector AOSLO, and spectral domain OCT en face view of the ellipsoid zone. CONCLUSION: Clinically available spectral domain OCT, viewed en face or as B-scan, may lead to misinterpretation of photoreceptor anatomy in a variety of diseases and injuries. This was demonstrated using split-detector AOSLO to reveal substantial populations of photoreceptors in areas of no, low, or ambiguous ellipsoid zone reflectivity with en face OCT and confocal AOSLO. Although it is unclear if these photoreceptors are functional, their presence offers hope for therapeutic strategies aimed at preserving or restoring photoreceptor function.
PURPOSE: To compare images of photoreceptor layer disruptions obtained with optical coherence tomography (OCT) and adaptive optics scanning light ophthalmoscopy (AOSLO) in a variety of pathologic states. METHODS: Five subjects with photoreceptor ellipsoid zone disruption as per OCT and clinical diagnoses of closed-globe blunt ocular trauma (n = 2), macular telangiectasia type 2 (n = 1), blue-cone monochromacy (n = 1), or cone-rod dystrophy (n = 1) were included. Images were acquired within and around photoreceptor lesions using spectral domain OCT, confocal AOSLO, and split-detector AOSLO. RESULTS: There were substantial differences in the extent and appearance of the photoreceptor mosaic as revealed by confocal AOSLO, split-detector AOSLO, and spectral domain OCT en face view of the ellipsoid zone. CONCLUSION: Clinically available spectral domain OCT, viewed en face or as B-scan, may lead to misinterpretation of photoreceptor anatomy in a variety of diseases and injuries. This was demonstrated using split-detector AOSLO to reveal substantial populations of photoreceptors in areas of no, low, or ambiguous ellipsoid zone reflectivity with en face OCT and confocal AOSLO. Although it is unclear if these photoreceptors are functional, their presence offers hope for therapeutic strategies aimed at preserving or restoring photoreceptor function.
Authors: Jiangang Gao; Kyeongmi Cheon; Steven Nusinowitz; Qin Liu; Di Bei; Karen Atkins; Asif Azimi; Stephen P Daiger; Debora B Farber; John R Heckenlively; Eric A Pierce; Lori S Sullivan; Jian Zuo Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2002-04-16 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: I Gorczynska; V J Srinivasan; L N Vuong; R W S Chen; J J Liu; E Reichel; M Wojtkowski; J S Schuman; J S Duker; J G Fujimoto Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2008-07-28 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Patrick T Johnson; Geoffrey P Lewis; Kevin C Talaga; Meghan N Brown; Peter J Kappel; Steven K Fisher; Don H Anderson; Lincoln V Johnson Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Veronique B D Kitiratschky; Robert Wilke; Agnes B Renner; Ulrich Kellner; Maria Vadalà; David G Birch; Bernd Wissinger; Eberhart Zrenner; Susanne Kohl Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2008-05-16 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Tjebo F C Heeren; Diána Kitka; Daniela Florea; Traci E Clemons; Emily Y Chew; Alan C Bird; Daniel Pauleikhoff; Peter Charbel Issa; Frank G Holz; Tunde Peto Journal: Retina Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Stephen A Burns; Ann E Elsner; Kaitlyn A Sapoznik; Raymond L Warner; Thomas J Gast Journal: Prog Retin Eye Res Date: 2018-08-27 Impact factor: 21.198
Authors: Mays Talib; Mary J van Schooneveld; Jan Wijnholds; Maria M van Genderen; Nicoline E Schalij-Delfos; Herman E Talsma; Ralph J Florijn; Jacoline B Ten Brink; Frans P M Cremers; Alberta A H J Thiadens; L Ingeborgh van den Born; Carel B Hoyng; Magda A Meester-Smoor; Arthur A Bergen; Camiel J F Boon Journal: Acta Ophthalmol Date: 2021-02-02 Impact factor: 3.761
Authors: Nitish Mehta; Fabio Lavinsky; Ryan Larochelle; Carl Rebhun; Nihaal B Mehta; Rebecca L Yanovsky; Michael N Cohen; Gregory D Lee; Vaidehi Dedania; Hiroshi Ishikawa; Gadi Wollstein; Joel S Schuman; Nadia Waheed; Yasha Modi Journal: Retina Date: 2021-01-01 Impact factor: 3.975