American journal of ophthalmology · 2022
A Comparison of Diagnostic Accuracy of Imaging Modalities to Detect Optic Disc Drusen: The Age of Enhanced Depth Imaging Optical Coherence Tomography.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Youn Saerom, Loshusan Brandon, Armstrong James J, Fraser J Alexander, Hamann Steffen, Bursztyn Lulu L C D
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To identify the most accurate diagnostic imaging modality to detect optic disc drusen (ODD) between B-scan ultrasonography (US), fundus photography, fundus autofluorescence (FAF), and enhanced depth imaging optical coherence tomography (EDI-OCT).
DESIGN: Comparative diagnostic analysis.
METHODS: Two hundred five eyes of 105 patients referred to 2 tertiary care neuro-ophthalmology clinics for suspected ODD were recruited: 108 eyes had ODD and 97 did not have ODD. All eyes received a full in-person ophthalmic exam with 3D view of the optic nerve and all 4 imaging modalities. Images were independently reviewed by 3 masked neuro-ophthalmologists to determine the presence or absence of ODD. Final interpretation was made through consensus. The reference standard was defined as the attending ophthalmologist's clinical judgement based on open chart review, with access to all image modalities and clinical information, including disease course. Main outcome measures were sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and precision for each imaging modality. Examiner confidence was quantified as the proportion of eyes in which the reviewers were certain of their decision.
RESULTS: The EDI-OCT had the highest sensitivity and accuracy (95%, 97%) to detect ODD, compared with FAF (84%, 92%), US (74%, 86%), and fundus photography (38%, 66%), respectively. All image modalities had high specificity (> 97%) and precision (> 93%). The EDI-OCT also had highest examiner confidence (96%) compared with all others (88%).
CONCLUSIONS: Among all modalities, EDI-OCT was the imaging modality with the highest diagnostic utility for the detection of ODD and should be considered as the preferred initial diagnostic modality.
DESIGN: Comparative diagnostic analysis.
METHODS: Two hundred five eyes of 105 patients referred to 2 tertiary care neuro-ophthalmology clinics for suspected ODD were recruited: 108 eyes had ODD and 97 did not have ODD. All eyes received a full in-person ophthalmic exam with 3D view of the optic nerve and all 4 imaging modalities. Images were independently reviewed by 3 masked neuro-ophthalmologists to determine the presence or absence of ODD. Final interpretation was made through consensus. The reference standard was defined as the attending ophthalmologist's clinical judgement based on open chart review, with access to all image modalities and clinical information, including disease course. Main outcome measures were sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and precision for each imaging modality. Examiner confidence was quantified as the proportion of eyes in which the reviewers were certain of their decision.
RESULTS: The EDI-OCT had the highest sensitivity and accuracy (95%, 97%) to detect ODD, compared with FAF (84%, 92%), US (74%, 86%), and fundus photography (38%, 66%), respectively. All image modalities had high specificity (> 97%) and precision (> 93%). The EDI-OCT also had highest examiner confidence (96%) compared with all others (88%).
CONCLUSIONS: Among all modalities, EDI-OCT was the imaging modality with the highest diagnostic utility for the detection of ODD and should be considered as the preferred initial diagnostic modality.