Cheolmin Yun1, Ki Tae Nam1, Seoyeon Park1, Soon-Young Hwang2, Jaeryung Oh3. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Korea University College of Medicine, 126-1 Anam-dong 5-ga, Sungbuk-gu, Seoul, 136-705, Korea. 2. Department of Biostatistics, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, Korea University College of Medicine, 126-1 Anam-dong 5-ga, Sungbuk-gu, Seoul, 136-705, Korea. ojr4991@korea.ac.kr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the features of the choriocapillaris using four different optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) devices. METHODS: OCTA images of the choriocapillaris from consecutive healthy subjects were obtained with four different OCTA devices (Zeiss PLEX Elite, Topcon DRI OCT-1 Atlantis, Zeiss AngioPlex, and Heidelberg Spectralis OCTA). The 3 × 3 mm OCTA images were processed with ImageJ. The mean vascular density and mean flow void area of the choriocapillaris were compared among devices. Flow voids were analyzed with two different imaging adjustment methods, auto-local threshold with the Phansalkar method and a method using a device-specific threshold value. RESULTS: The mean vascular density of the choriocapillaris differed among the four devices (all P < 0.001). The mean flow void area as measured with the auto-local threshold method also differed among devices (P < 0.001) and was not correlated among devices (all P > 0.05). Results for mean flow void area measured with a device-specific threshold value using the Plex-Elite and DRI OCT-1 Atlantis were correlated (ß = 2.271, P < 0.001), but there were no correlations among other devices (P > 0.05). For the Plex-Elite and DRI OCT-1 Atlantis, the mean flow void area was positively correlated between the two image adjustment methods (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Vascular densities and flow void areas of the choriocapillaris varied according to the device used and the image adjustment method. The characteristics of different devices and the image adjustment method should be considered for analysis of the choriocapillaris.
PURPOSE: To investigate the features of the choriocapillaris using four different optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) devices. METHODS: OCTA images of the choriocapillaris from consecutive healthy subjects were obtained with four different OCTA devices (Zeiss PLEX Elite, Topcon DRI OCT-1 Atlantis, Zeiss AngioPlex, and Heidelberg Spectralis OCTA). The 3 × 3 mm OCTA images were processed with ImageJ. The mean vascular density and mean flow void area of the choriocapillaris were compared among devices. Flow voids were analyzed with two different imaging adjustment methods, auto-local threshold with the Phansalkar method and a method using a device-specific threshold value. RESULTS: The mean vascular density of the choriocapillaris differed among the four devices (all P < 0.001). The mean flow void area as measured with the auto-local threshold method also differed among devices (P < 0.001) and was not correlated among devices (all P > 0.05). Results for mean flow void area measured with a device-specific threshold value using the Plex-Elite and DRI OCT-1 Atlantis were correlated (ß = 2.271, P < 0.001), but there were no correlations among other devices (P > 0.05). For the Plex-Elite and DRI OCT-1 Atlantis, the mean flow void area was positively correlated between the two image adjustment methods (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Vascular densities and flow void areas of the choriocapillaris varied according to the device used and the image adjustment method. The characteristics of different devices and the image adjustment method should be considered for analysis of the choriocapillaris.
Entities:
Keywords:
Choriocapillaris; Flow voids; Optical coherence tomography angiography; Vascular density
Authors: Sergio Copete; Ignacio Flores-Moreno; Javier A Montero; Jay S Duker; José M Ruiz-Moreno Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2013-11-28 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Jost L Lauermann; Peter Heiduschka; Pieter Nelis; Maximilian Treder; Maged Alnawaiseh; Christoph R Clemens; Nicole Eter; Florian Alten Journal: Ophthalmologica Date: 2017-04-22 Impact factor: 3.250
Authors: Philip J Rosenfeld; Mary K Durbin; Luiz Roisman; Fang Zheng; Andrew Miller; Gillian Robbins; Karen B Schaal; Giovanni Gregori Journal: Dev Ophthalmol Date: 2016-03-15
Authors: Alessandro Rabiolo; Francesco Gelormini; Alessandro Marchese; Maria Vittoria Cicinelli; Giacinto Triolo; Riccardo Sacconi; Lea Querques; Francesco Bandello; Giuseppe Querques Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2018-01-01 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: WooJhon Choi; Nadia K Waheed; Eric M Moult; Mehreen Adhi; ByungKun Lee; Talisa De Carlo; Vijaysekhar Jayaraman; Caroline R Baumal; Jay S Duker; James G Fujimoto Journal: Retina Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Simon S Gao; Yali Jia; Miao Zhang; Johnny P Su; Gangjun Liu; Thomas S Hwang; Steven T Bailey; David Huang Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2016-07-01 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Marion R Munk; Helena Giannakaki-Zimmermann; Lieselotte Berger; Wolfgang Huf; Andreas Ebneter; Sebastian Wolf; Martin S Zinkernagel Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-05-10 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Henrik Faatz; Kai Rothaus; Martin Ziegler; Marius Book; Claudia Lommatzsch; Georg Spital; Matthias Gutfleisch; Daniel Pauleikhoff; Albrecht Lommatzsch Journal: Clin Ophthalmol Date: 2020-10-09
Authors: Michael Reich; Daniel Boehringer; Kai Rothaus; Bertan Cakir; Felicitas Bucher; Moritz Daniel; Stefan J Lang; Wolf A Lagrèze; Hansjuergen Agostini; Clemens Lange Journal: Int Ophthalmol Date: 2020-04-24 Impact factor: 2.031