Ruben Jauregui1, Karen Sophia Park2, Jimmy K Duong3, Janet R Sparrow4, Stephen H Tsang5. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York, USA; Jonas Children's Vision Care and Bernard & Shirlee Brown Glaucoma Laboratory, New York, New York, USA; Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York, USA; Jonas Children's Vision Care and Bernard & Shirlee Brown Glaucoma Laboratory, New York, New York, USA. 3. Department of Biostatistics, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA. 4. Department of Ophthalmology, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York, USA; Jonas Children's Vision Care and Bernard & Shirlee Brown Glaucoma Laboratory, New York, New York, USA; Department of Pathology & Cell Biology, Stem Cell Initiative (CSCI), Institute of Human Nutrition, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA. 5. Department of Ophthalmology, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, New York, USA; Jonas Children's Vision Care and Bernard & Shirlee Brown Glaucoma Laboratory, New York, New York, USA; Department of Pathology & Cell Biology, Stem Cell Initiative (CSCI), Institute of Human Nutrition, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA. Electronic address: sht2@cumc.columbia.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To quantitatively compare near-infrared autofluorescence (NIR-AF) and short-wave autofluorescence (SW-AF) as imaging modalities used to monitor retinitis pigmentosa (RP) disease progression, measured as a function of hyperautofluorescent ring constriction over time. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: NIR-AF and SW-AF images were acquired from 22 participants (44 eyes) at 2 clinic visits separated by an average of 2 years. On the images from each modality, the horizontal and vertical diameters and area of the hyperautofluorescent rings were measured twice, 2 weeks apart. A progression rate for each parameter was obtained. Descriptive and comparative statistics were calculated to analyze these parameters and their respective progression rates. RESULTS: At both visits, the hyperautofluorescent ring exhibited a larger horizontal diameter (both visits: P < .001), vertical diameter (visit 1: P < .001, visit 2: P = .040), and ring area (visit 1: P = .001, visit 2: P = .011) in SW-AF vs NIR-AF images. In SW-AF, the horizontal diameter, vertical diameter, and ring area decreased yearly by 168 ± 204 μm, 131 ± 159 μm, and 0.7 ± 1.1 mm2, respectively, while in NIR-AF, they decreased by 151 ± 156 μm, 135 ± 190 μm, and 0.7 ± 1.0 mm2. No difference was observed in these rates between SW-AF and NIR-AF. Similar results were observed in the left eye. CONCLUSIONS: In SW-AF and NIR-AF images, similar rates of RP disease progression are observed. As such, NIR-AF may confer more advantages as the primary tool for tracking disease progression over the commonly used SW-AF, given the increased patient comfort and cooperation during imaging.
PURPOSE: To quantitatively compare near-infrared autofluorescence (NIR-AF) and short-wave autofluorescence (SW-AF) as imaging modalities used to monitor retinitis pigmentosa (RP) disease progression, measured as a function of hyperautofluorescent ring constriction over time. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS:NIR-AF and SW-AF images were acquired from 22 participants (44 eyes) at 2 clinic visits separated by an average of 2 years. On the images from each modality, the horizontal and vertical diameters and area of the hyperautofluorescent rings were measured twice, 2 weeks apart. A progression rate for each parameter was obtained. Descriptive and comparative statistics were calculated to analyze these parameters and their respective progression rates. RESULTS: At both visits, the hyperautofluorescent ring exhibited a larger horizontal diameter (both visits: P < .001), vertical diameter (visit 1: P < .001, visit 2: P = .040), and ring area (visit 1: P = .001, visit 2: P = .011) in SW-AF vs NIR-AF images. In SW-AF, the horizontal diameter, vertical diameter, and ring area decreased yearly by 168 ± 204 μm, 131 ± 159 μm, and 0.7 ± 1.1 mm2, respectively, while in NIR-AF, they decreased by 151 ± 156 μm, 135 ± 190 μm, and 0.7 ± 1.0 mm2. No difference was observed in these rates between SW-AF and NIR-AF. Similar results were observed in the left eye. CONCLUSIONS: In SW-AF and NIR-AF images, similar rates of RP disease progression are observed. As such, NIR-AF may confer more advantages as the primary tool for tracking disease progression over the commonly used SW-AF, given the increased patient comfort and cooperation during imaging.
Authors: Donald C Hood; Margot A Lazow; Kirsten G Locke; Vivienne C Greenstein; David G Birch Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2011-01-05 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: David G Birch; Kirsten G Locke; Yuquan Wen; Kelly I Locke; Dennis R Hoffman; Donald C Hood Journal: JAMA Ophthalmol Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 7.389
Authors: Vivienne C Greenstein; Ari D Schuman; Winston Lee; Tobias Duncker; Jana Zernant; Rando Allikmets; Donald C Hood; Janet R Sparrow Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Luiz H Lima; Wener Cella; Vivienne C Greenstein; Nan-Kai Wang; Mihai Busuioc; R Theodore Smith; Lawrence A Yannuzzi; Stephen H Tsang Journal: Retina Date: 2009 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Artur V Cideciyan; Malgorzata Swider; Tomas S Aleman; Marisa I Roman; Alexander Sumaroka; Sharon B Schwartz; Edwin M Stone; Samuel G Jacobson Journal: J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 2.129
Authors: Thiago Cabral; Jesse D Sengillo; Jimmy K Duong; Sally Justus; Katherine Boudreault; Kaspar Schuerch; Rubens Belfort; Vinit B Mahajan; Janet R Sparrow; Stephen H Tsang Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-09-04 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Rithambara Ramachandran; Lisa Zhou; Kirsten G Locke; David G Birch; Donald C Hood Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2013-11-11 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Janet R Sparrow; Tobias Duncker; Kaspar Schuerch; Maarjaliis Paavo; Jose Ronaldo Lima de Carvalho Journal: Prog Retin Eye Res Date: 2019-08-28 Impact factor: 21.198
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: Ruben Jauregui; Vitor K L Takahashi; Karen Sophia Park; Xuan Cui; Julia T Takiuti; Jose Ronaldo Lima de Carvalho; Stephen H Tsang Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-07-24 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Ruben Jauregui; Yan Nuzbrokh; Pei-Yin Su; Jana Zernant; Rando Allikmets; Stephen H Tsang; Janet R Sparrow Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2021-01-05 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Ruben Jauregui; Rait Parmann; Yan Nuzbrokh; Stephen H Tsang; Janet R Sparrow Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2020-08-05 Impact factor: 3.283