Screening for retinopathy of prematurity--a comparison between binocular indirect ophthalmoscopy and RetCam 120.

AIM: To compare the photographic screening for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) using RetCam 120 with binocular indirect ophthalmoscope (BIO), which is the current gold standard.

SETTING AND

DESIGN

Prospective, comparative study.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

A total of 87 RetCam examinations were performed on 27 premature babies. They were stored in a separate file after deleting the identifying information. At the same visit using the BIO with scleral depression, an experienced vitreoretinal surgeon evaluated the fundus in detail. A masked examiner then evaluated the RetCam photographs for presence or absence of ROP, the stage and zone of the disease and the presence or absence of plus disease. These data were then compared with the BIO findings to determine the sensitivity, specificity and the positive and negative predictive values of the method.

RESULTS

ROP was detected in 63 of 87 examinations by BIO and in 56 of 87 RetCam examinations. Nine RetCam examinations were false-negative and two were false-positive. Sensitivity of RetCam was 85.71% (54/63) and specificity was 91.66% (22/24). The positive and negative predictive values were 96.43% and 70.97% respectively.

CONCLUSION

Nine cases having ROP were missed by the RetCam. All these cases were either in zone 3 or the outer part of zone 2, which later regressed. These were missed mostly because of the restricted mobility of the camera head caused by its size and the barrier caused by the lid speculum arms. No case of threshold ROP was missed. RetCam may replace BIO for screening of ROP.