Gregor S Reiter1, Christoph Grechenig1, Wolf-Dieter Vogl1, Robyn H Guymer2, Jennifer J Arnold3, Hrvoje Bogunovic1, Ursula Schmidt-Erfurth1. 1. Department of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Christian Doppler Laboratory for Ophthalmic Image Analysis, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 2. Department of Surgery (Ophthalmology), Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, and University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia; and. 3. Marsden Eye Specialists, Parramatta, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate quantitative differences in fluid volumes between subretinal fluid (SRF)-tolerant and SRF-intolerant treat-and-extend regimens for neovascular age-related macular degeneration and analyze the association with best-corrected visual acuity. METHODS: Macular fluid (SRF and intraretinal fluid) was quantified on optical coherence tomography volumetric scans using a trained and validated deep learning algorithm. Fluid volumes and complete resolution was automatically assessed throughout the study. The impact of fluid location and volumes on best-corrected visual acuity was computed using mixed-effects regression models. RESULTS: Baseline fluid quantifications for 348 eyes from 348 patients were balanced (all P > 0.05). No quantitative differences in SRF/intraretinal fluid between the treatment arms was found at any study-specific time point (all P > 0.05). Compared with qualitative assessment, the proportion of eyes without SRF/intraretinal fluid did not differ between the groups at any time point (all P > 0.05). Intraretinal fluid in the central 1 mm and SRF in the 1-mm to 6-mm macular area were negatively associated with best-corrected visual acuity (-2.8 letters/100 nL intraretinal fluid, P = 0.007 and -0.20 letters/100 nL SRF, P = 0.005, respectively). CONCLUSION: Automated fluid quantification using artificial intelligence allows objective and precise assessment of macular fluid volume and location. Precise determination of fluid parameters will help improve therapeutic efficacy of treatment in neovascular age-related macular degeneration.
PURPOSE: To investigate quantitative differences in fluid volumes between subretinal fluid (SRF)-tolerant and SRF-intolerant treat-and-extend regimens for neovascular age-related macular degeneration and analyze the association with best-corrected visual acuity. METHODS: Macular fluid (SRF and intraretinal fluid) was quantified on optical coherence tomography volumetric scans using a trained and validated deep learning algorithm. Fluid volumes and complete resolution was automatically assessed throughout the study. The impact of fluid location and volumes on best-corrected visual acuity was computed using mixed-effects regression models. RESULTS: Baseline fluid quantifications for 348 eyes from 348 patients were balanced (all P > 0.05). No quantitative differences in SRF/intraretinal fluid between the treatment arms was found at any study-specific time point (all P > 0.05). Compared with qualitative assessment, the proportion of eyes without SRF/intraretinal fluid did not differ between the groups at any time point (all P > 0.05). Intraretinal fluid in the central 1 mm and SRF in the 1-mm to 6-mm macular area were negatively associated with best-corrected visual acuity (-2.8 letters/100 nL intraretinal fluid, P = 0.007 and -0.20 letters/100 nL SRF, P = 0.005, respectively). CONCLUSION: Automated fluid quantification using artificial intelligence allows objective and precise assessment of macular fluid volume and location. Precise determination of fluid parameters will help improve therapeutic efficacy of treatment in neovascular age-related macular degeneration.
Authors: Ursula Schmidt-Erfurth; Zufar Mulyukov; Bianca S Gerendas; Gregor S Reiter; Daniel Lorand; Georges Weissgerber; Hrvoje Bogunović Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2022-05-06 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: H Faatz; N Feltgen; M Gutfleisch; B Heimes-Bussmann; T U Krohne; S Liakopoulos; R Liegl; A Lommatzsch; P Mussinghoff; M Rehak; S Schmitz-Valckenberg; G Spital; B Stanzel; F Ziemssen; B Hägele; C Junkes; M Porstner; J Vögeler; B Gmeiner; D Pauleikhoff Journal: Ophthalmologie Date: 2022-09-20
Authors: Leonard M Coulibaly; Stefan Sacu; Philipp Fuchs; Hrvoje Bogunovic; Georg Faustmann; Christian Unterrainer; Gregor S Reiter; Ursula Schmidt-Erfurth Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2022-07-05 Impact factor: 4.456
Authors: Reinhard Angermann; Alexander Franchi; Victoria Stöckl; Julia Rettenwander; Tanja Rettenwander; David Goldin; Martin Stattin; Martina T Kralinger; Claus Zehetner Journal: Ophthalmol Ther Date: 2022-01-19