PURPOSE: To evaluate depth of field, lateral resolution, and image quality of a heads-up 3D visualization system for vitreoretinal surgery using physician survey and optical measurement outcomes. METHODS: Depth of field and lateral resolution were compared between the standard ocular viewing system and the digital 3D system at ×5, ×13, and ×18 magnification by 6 retinal surgeons. Optical techniques were used as well as a survey of surgeon impression. Surgeon impression surveys were performed after 6 weeks of surgical use of the device. RESULTS: Physician questionnaire survey scores for depth of field at high magnification were better for the digital 3D system and equivalent for all other categories. Measured lateral resolution was 36.7 mm and 16.6 mm at ×5 magnification (P < 0.001), 14.3 mm and 6.4 mm at ×13 magnification (P < 0.001), and 9.8 mm and 4.2 mm (P < 0.001) at ×18 magnification for the digital 3D and oculars, respectively. Measured depth of field was 4.00 mm and 6.78 mm at ×5 magnification (P = 0.027), 0.72 mm and 0.86 mm at ×13 (P = 0.311), and 0.28 mm and 0.40 mm at ×18 magnification (P = 0.235) for the oculars and digital 3D, respectively. CONCLUSION: Lateral resolution of the digital 3D system was half that of the ocular viewing system and there was some improvement in depth of field with the digital system. Surgeon impression suggested that the digital system was superior when evaluating depth of field at high magnification.
PURPOSE: To evaluate depth of field, lateral resolution, and image quality of a heads-up 3D visualization system for vitreoretinal surgery using physician survey and optical measurement outcomes. METHODS: Depth of field and lateral resolution were compared between the standard ocular viewing system and the digital 3D system at ×5, ×13, and ×18 magnification by 6 retinal surgeons. Optical techniques were used as well as a survey of surgeon impression. Surgeon impression surveys were performed after 6 weeks of surgical use of the device. RESULTS: Physician questionnaire survey scores for depth of field at high magnification were better for the digital 3D system and equivalent for all other categories. Measured lateral resolution was 36.7 mm and 16.6 mm at ×5 magnification (P < 0.001), 14.3 mm and 6.4 mm at ×13 magnification (P < 0.001), and 9.8 mm and 4.2 mm (P < 0.001) at ×18 magnification for the digital 3D and oculars, respectively. Measured depth of field was 4.00 mm and 6.78 mm at ×5 magnification (P = 0.027), 0.72 mm and 0.86 mm at ×13 (P = 0.311), and 0.28 mm and 0.40 mm at ×18 magnification (P = 0.235) for the oculars and digital 3D, respectively. CONCLUSION: Lateral resolution of the digital 3D system was half that of the ocular viewing system and there was some improvement in depth of field with the digital system. Surgeon impression suggested that the digital system was superior when evaluating depth of field at high magnification.
Authors: Joshua S Agranat; John B Miller; Vivian Paraskevi Douglas; Konstantinos A A Douglas; Anna Marmalidou; Matthew A Cunningham; Samuel K Houston Journal: Clin Ophthalmol Date: 2019-10-24