Shira Benyamini1, Anat Loewenstein1,2, Elad Moisseiev1,3. 1. Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, Tel Aviv Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel; and. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, Meir Medical Center, Kfar Saba, Israel.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy and uniformity of the definitions used to diagnose vitreoretinal (VR) interface disorders and to assess it after review of its definitions. METHODS: A case-series study, consisting of a questionnaire of 46 optical coherence tomography images of six VR interface disorders: vitreomacular adhesion, vitreomacular traction, epiretinal membrane, full-thickness macular hole, lamellar macular hole, and pseudohole. Images were presented to 41 practicing ophthalmologists (13 residents, 11 VR specialists, and 17 non-VR specialists), and a diagnosis was recorded for each image. The questionnaire was repeated after review of the International Vitreomacular Traction Study (IVTS) group classification. Rates of accuracy and uniformity for each condition were analyzed. RESULTS: Overall correct identification rates according to the IVTS classification were achieved in 67.4% of cases and were highest for epiretinal membrane and full-thickness macular hole, followed by vitreomacular adhesion, vitreomacular traction, and lamellar macular hole, and were significantly lower for pseudohole (P < 0.001). Accuracy was higher among VR specialists and was associated with previous familiarity with the IVTS classification (P = 0.043) but not with length of experience in ophthalmology (P = 0.74). After review of the IVTS classification, overall correct identification rates improved to 71.7% (P = 0.004), with the significant improvement in pseudohole identification (P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: The IVTS classification is effective in standardizing the diagnosis of VR interface disorders. It is expected to become increasingly assimilated among ophthalmologists over time, leading to higher rates of accuracy and uniformity in diagnosing VR interface disorders.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy and uniformity of the definitions used to diagnose vitreoretinal (VR) interface disorders and to assess it after review of its definitions. METHODS: A case-series study, consisting of a questionnaire of 46 optical coherence tomography images of six VR interface disorders: vitreomacular adhesion, vitreomacular traction, epiretinal membrane, full-thickness macular hole, lamellar macular hole, and pseudohole. Images were presented to 41 practicing ophthalmologists (13 residents, 11 VR specialists, and 17 non-VR specialists), and a diagnosis was recorded for each image. The questionnaire was repeated after review of the International Vitreomacular Traction Study (IVTS) group classification. Rates of accuracy and uniformity for each condition were analyzed. RESULTS: Overall correct identification rates according to the IVTS classification were achieved in 67.4% of cases and were highest for epiretinal membrane and full-thickness macular hole, followed by vitreomacular adhesion, vitreomacular traction, and lamellar macular hole, and were significantly lower for pseudohole (P < 0.001). Accuracy was higher among VR specialists and was associated with previous familiarity with the IVTS classification (P = 0.043) but not with length of experience in ophthalmology (P = 0.74). After review of the IVTS classification, overall correct identification rates improved to 71.7% (P = 0.004), with the significant improvement in pseudohole identification (P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: The IVTS classification is effective in standardizing the diagnosis of VR interface disorders. It is expected to become increasingly assimilated among ophthalmologists over time, leading to higher rates of accuracy and uniformity in diagnosing VR interface disorders.