Miao Wang1, Sheng Gao1, Yun Zhang1, Meixia Zhang2,3. 1. Macular Disease Research Laboratory, Department of Ophthalmology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China. 2. Macular Disease Research Laboratory, Department of Ophthalmology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China. coretina@gmail.com. 3. National Clinical Research Center for Geriatrics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China. coretina@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic value of optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) for active choroidal neovascularization (CNV) of all types and etiologies. METHODS: We searched the Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Medline, and Embase databases for all interrelated published studies from inception to August 2020. Meta-disc and STATA were used for the data analyses. We measured the diagnostic value by assessing the pooled diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (sROC AUC). Sources of heterogeneity were also analyzed. RESULTS: Nine studies involving 785 eyes were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-0.88), specificity was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.79-0.94), PLR was 7.4 (95% CI, 3.8-14.6), NLR was 0.20 (95% CI, 0.13-0.29), and DOR was 38 (95% CI, 16-91). The sROC AUC was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.89-0.94). With respect to heterogeneity, the sensitivity of the fluorescein angiography (FA) reference standard group (0.71 [0.64-0.78]) and developed country group (0.77 [0.70-0.84]) was both lower than the sensitivity of the FA combined with optical coherence tomography (OCT) reference standard group (0.89 [0.84-0.93], P < 0.001) and developing country group (0.90 [0.85-0.95], P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that OCTA is a non-invasive, convenient diagnostic method for active CNV and has high diagnostic value. Moreover, the accuracy of the diagnostic accuracy is independent of the types of device, algorithms, and the etiology of CNV.
PURPOSE: This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic value of optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) for active choroidal neovascularization (CNV) of all types and etiologies. METHODS: We searched the Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Medline, and Embase databases for all interrelated published studies from inception to August 2020. Meta-disc and STATA were used for the data analyses. We measured the diagnostic value by assessing the pooled diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (sROC AUC). Sources of heterogeneity were also analyzed. RESULTS: Nine studies involving 785 eyes were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-0.88), specificity was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.79-0.94), PLR was 7.4 (95% CI, 3.8-14.6), NLR was 0.20 (95% CI, 0.13-0.29), and DOR was 38 (95% CI, 16-91). The sROC AUC was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.89-0.94). With respect to heterogeneity, the sensitivity of the fluorescein angiography (FA) reference standard group (0.71 [0.64-0.78]) and developed country group (0.77 [0.70-0.84]) was both lower than the sensitivity of the FA combined with optical coherence tomography (OCT) reference standard group (0.89 [0.84-0.93], P < 0.001) and developing country group (0.90 [0.85-0.95], P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that OCTA is a non-invasive, convenient diagnostic method for active CNV and has high diagnostic value. Moreover, the accuracy of the diagnostic accuracy is independent of the types of device, algorithms, and the etiology of CNV.
Entities:
Keywords:
Choroidal neovascularization; Meta-analysis; Optical coherence tomography angiography; Sensitivity and specificity of diagnosis
Authors: Jayakrishna Ambati; Balamurali K Ambati; Sonia H Yoo; Sean Ianchulev; Anthony P Adamis Journal: Surv Ophthalmol Date: 2003 May-Jun Impact factor: 6.048
Authors: Richard F Spaide; James G Fujimoto; Nadia K Waheed; Srinivas R Sadda; Giovanni Staurenghi Journal: Prog Retin Eye Res Date: 2017-12-08 Impact factor: 21.198
Authors: Talisa E de Carlo; Marco A Bonini Filho; Adam T Chin; Mehreen Adhi; Daniela Ferrara; Caroline R Baumal; Andre J Witkin; Elias Reichel; Jay S Duker; Nadia K Waheed Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2015-03-17 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Ambar Faridi; Yali Jia; Simon S Gao; David Huang; Kavita V Bhavsar; David J Wilson; Andrew Sill; Christina J Flaxel; Thomas S Hwang; Andreas K Lauer; Steven T Bailey Journal: Ophthalmol Retina Date: 2017 Jul-Aug