Sophia S Wong1, Vivian S Vuong1, David Cunefare2, Sina Farsiu3, Ala Moshiri1, Glenn Yiu4. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California. 2. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 3. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 4. Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California. Electronic address: gyiu@ucdavis.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine if different types of retinal fluid in the central macula affect the reproducibility of choroidal thickness (CT) measurements on enhanced depth imaging optical coherence tomography (EDI-OCT). DESIGN: Retrospective reliability analysis. METHODS: EDI-OCT images were obtained and the choroidal-scleral junction was analyzed through semiautomated segmentation. CT was measured at the fovea and averaged across the central 3-mm horizontal segment. Demographic data, central macular thickness, and type of fluid present were recorded. Intragrader and intergrader repeatability were assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of repeatability (CR). RESULTS: Of 124 eyes analyzed, 60 (48.4%) had diabetic macular edema, 32 (25.8%) had neovascular age-related macular degeneration, and 32 (25.8%) had other causes of fluid. Intergrader ICC (CR) was 0.95 (74.1 μm) and 0.96 (63.9 μm) for subfoveal and average CT, respectively. CR was similar across various causes of retinal fluid, but was worst for subretinal fluid compared to intraretinal or sub-retinal pigment epithelial fluid. CR also worsened with increasing choroidal thickness, but was not affected by retinal thickness. Intragrader repeatability was generally greater than intergrader values, and followed the same trend. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of macular fluid reduces CT measurement reproducibility, particularly in eyes with subretinal fluid and greater choroidal thickness. A difference of 74.1 μm in subfoveal CT or 63.9 μm in average CT may be necessary to detect true clinical change in eyes with macular fluid.
PURPOSE: To determine if different types of retinal fluid in the central macula affect the reproducibility of choroidal thickness (CT) measurements on enhanced depth imaging optical coherence tomography (EDI-OCT). DESIGN: Retrospective reliability analysis. METHODS: EDI-OCT images were obtained and the choroidal-scleral junction was analyzed through semiautomated segmentation. CT was measured at the fovea and averaged across the central 3-mm horizontal segment. Demographic data, central macular thickness, and type of fluid present were recorded. Intragrader and intergrader repeatability were assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of repeatability (CR). RESULTS: Of 124 eyes analyzed, 60 (48.4%) had diabetic macular edema, 32 (25.8%) had neovascular age-related macular degeneration, and 32 (25.8%) had other causes of fluid. Intergrader ICC (CR) was 0.95 (74.1 μm) and 0.96 (63.9 μm) for subfoveal and average CT, respectively. CR was similar across various causes of retinal fluid, but was worst for subretinal fluid compared to intraretinal or sub-retinal pigment epithelial fluid. CR also worsened with increasing choroidal thickness, but was not affected by retinal thickness. Intragrader repeatability was generally greater than intergrader values, and followed the same trend. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of macular fluid reduces CT measurement reproducibility, particularly in eyes with subretinal fluid and greater choroidal thickness. A difference of 74.1 μm in subfoveal CT or 63.9 μm in average CT may be necessary to detect true clinical change in eyes with macular fluid.
Authors: Sieun Lee; Nader Fallah; Farzin Forooghian; Ashley Ko; Kaivon Pakzad-Vaezi; Andrew B Merkur; Andrew W Kirker; David A Albiani; Mei Young; Marinko V Sarunic; Mirza Faisal Beg Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2013-04-23 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Lauren Branchini; Caio V Regatieri; Ignacio Flores-Moreno; Bernhard Baumann; James G Fujimoto; Jay S Duker Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2011-09-23 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Marieh Esmaeelpour; Boris Považay; Boris Hermann; Bernd Hofer; Vedran Kajic; Sarah L Hale; Rachel V North; Wolfgang Drexler; Nik J L Sheen Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2011-07-15 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Glenn Yiu; Zhe Wang; Christian Munevar; Eric Tieu; Bradley Shibata; Brittany Wong; David Cunefare; Sina Farsiu; Jeffrey Roberts; Sara M Thomasy Journal: Exp Eye Res Date: 2018-01-17 Impact factor: 3.467
Authors: Sophie C Lee; Steven Tran; Aana Amin; Lawrence S Morse; Ala Moshiri; Susanna S Park; Glenn Yiu Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2019-12-16 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Tu M Tran; Soohyun Kim; Kira H Lin; Sook Hyun Chung; Sangwan Park; Yevgeniy Sazhnyev; Yinwen Wang; David Cunefare; Sina Farsiu; Sara M Thomasy; Ala Moshiri; Glenn Yiu Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Glenn Yiu; Sara M Thomasy; M Isabel Casanova; Alexander Rusakevich; Rebekah I Keesler; Jennifer Watanabe; Jodie Usachenko; Anil Singapuri; Erin E Ball; Eliza Bliss-Moreau; Wendi Guo; Helen Webster; Tulika Singh; Sallie Permar; Amir Ardeshir; Lark L Coffey; Koen Ka Van Rompay Journal: JCI Insight Date: 2020-12-17
Authors: Lekha K Mukkamala; Jaycob Avaylon; R Joel Welch; Amirfarbod Yazdanyar; Parisa Emami-Naeini; Sophia Wong; Jordan Storkersen; Jessica Loo; David Cunefare; Sina Farsiu; Ala Moshiri; Susanna S Park; Glenn Yiu Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2021-02-05 Impact factor: 3.048