| Literature DB >> 30300393 |
Florence Coscas1,2, Diogo Cabral1,3,4,5, Telmo Pereira3,4, Carlos Geraldes3,6, Hemaxi Narotamo4, Alexandra Miere2, Marco Lupidi7, Alexandre Sellam8, Ana Papoila3,6, Gabriel Coscas1,2, Eric Souied2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To characterize quantitative optical coherence tomography angiography (OCT-A) parameters in active neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) patients under treatment and remission nAMD patients.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30300393 PMCID: PMC6177171 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205513
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) images showing the filtering schema on a dense net hypersignal of active choroidal neovascularization.
A) OCTA outer retina layers blood flow image. B) Speckle noise removal and automatic blood flow delineation. C) Graphic with the output of the box-counting method: N (the number of boxes needed to cover the set) as a function of R (the size of the boxes); as the set is a fractal, we can observe a power-law relationship [N = N0 * R^(-DF)], being DF the fractal dimension (Kolmogorov capacity). D) Corresponding optical coherence tomography (OCT) B-scan showing a active type 1 CNV with sub-retinal fluid.
Fig 2Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) images showing the filtering schema on a loose net hypersignal of inactive choroidal neovascularization.
A) OCT-A outer retina layers blood flow image. B) Speckle noise removal and automatic blood flow delineation. C) Graphic with the output of the box-counting method: N (the number of boxes needed to cover the set) as a function of R (the size of the boxes); as the set is a fractal, we can observe a power-law relationship [N = N0 * R^(-DF)], being DF the fractal dimension (Kolmogorov capacity). D) Corresponding optical coherence tomography (OCT) B-scan showing a inactive type 1 CNV with sub-retinal fibrosis.
Demographic and structural and angiography optical coherence tomography characteristics by group.
| Group 1 (Active nAMD) | Group 2 (Remission nAMD) | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 81.1 (7.6) | 81.1 (7.0) | 0.963 | |
| 52.8 (33.6) [8, 125] | 189.8 (82.1) [36, 358] | <0.001 | |
| 17.0 (11.0–27.3) [5, 69] | 12.0 (9.0–14.3) [5, 27] | 0.003 | |
| 65.0 (49.0–75.0) [13.0, 89.0] | 44.0 (31.0–55.0) [3.0, 83.0] | <0.001 | |
| 1.44 (0.09) [1.24, 1.66] | 1.50 (0.04) [1.40, 1.58] | <0.001 | |
| 0.38 (0.06) [0.27, 0.53] | 0.39 (0.36–0.42) [0.32, 0.47] | 0.195 | |
| 1.94 (0.76–3.30) [0.12, 13.03] | 5.82 (3.72–8.20) [1.17, 12.82] | <0.001 | |
| 0.49 (0.41–0.56) [0.26, 0.87] | 0.39 (0.36–0.45) [0.26, 0.60] | <0.001 | |
| 0.70 (0.13) [0.40, 0.93] | 0.74 (0.14) [0.46, 0.94] | 0.093 | |
| 301.5 (257.8–372.3) [185.0, 854.0] | 260.0 (214.8–308.5) [130.0, 451.0] | <0.001 |
Continuous variables were presented as mean and standard deviation (SD) or median and interquartile range (25th percentile - 75th percentile) and range ([min, max]), as appropriate. IVI: Intra vitreal injection–. FD—Fractal dimension. LAC–Lacunarity. nAMD: neovascular Age Related Macular Degeneration. CMT—Central Macular Thickness. VA–Visual Acuity.
*Obtained by chi-squared and Mann–Whitney non parametric tests.
Models’ performance analysis.
| AUC (95% CI) | AIC | Brier’s Score | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.75 (0.66, 0.85) | 113.2 | 0.1792 | |
| 0.65 (0.54, 0.76) | 126.1 | 0.1982 | |
| 0.80 (0.71, 0.88) | 106.1 | 0.1629 | |
| 0.85 (0.77, 0.93) | 97.1 | 0.1417 | |
| 0.85 (0.77, 0.93) | 99.0 | 0.1420 | |
| 0.85 (0.78, 0.93) | 98.4 | 0.1397 | |
| 0.91 (0.85, 0.97) | 84.4 | 0.1138 |
Dens–Vessel Density. LAC–Lacunarity. FD–Fractal dimension. AUC–area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve. CI–Confidence Interval, AIC -Akaike information criterion.
Fig 3Composite with partial functions showing the association between OCTA quantitative parameters and choroidal neovascularization (CNV) status.
A) Association between fractal dimension and the odds of CNV status—higher odds of active CNV correspond to values lower than 1.41, and more protection is related to values higher than 1.46. B) Association between CNV area and the odds of CNV status—higher odds of active CNV is related to values lower than 2.4 and values higher than 3.8 correspond to protection C) Association between vessel density and the odds of CNV status—values below 0.44 correspond to protection and above 0.50 to higher odds of active CNV. D) Association between lacunarity and the odds of CNV status—cutoff values were not obtained as zero value is contained in all the confidence intervals.