MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.ajo.2012.03.019

Медицинская библиотека · American journal of ophthalmology · 2012

Nonmydriatic ultrawide field retinal imaging compared with dilated standard 7-field 35-mm photography and retinal specialist examination for evaluation of diabetic retinopathy.

Silva Paolo S, Cavallerano Jerry D, Sun Jennifer K, Noble Jason, Aiello Lloyd M, Aiello Lloyd Paul

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАВалидационное исследованиеПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

PURPOSE: To compare nonmydriatic stereoscopic Optomap ultrawide field images with dilated stereoscopic Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study 7-standard field 35-mm color 30-degree fundus photographs (ETDRS photography) and clinical examination for determining diabetic retinopathy (DR) and diabetic macular edema (DME) severity.

DESIGN

Single-site, prospective, comparative, instrument validation study.

METHODS

One hundred three diabetic patients (206 eyes) representing the full spectrum of DR severity underwent nonmydriatic ultrawide field 100-degree and 200-degree imaging, dilated ETDRS photography, and dilated fundus examination by a retina specialist. Two independent readers graded images to determine DR and DME severity. A third masked retina specialist adjudicated discrepancies.

RESULTS

Based on ETDRS photography (n = 200), the results were as follows: no DR (n = 25 eyes [12.5%]), mild nonproliferative DR (NPDR; 47 [23.5%]), moderate NPDR (61 [30.5%]), severe NPDR (11 [5.5%]), very severe NPDR (3 [1.5%]), and proliferative DR (52 [2.5%]). One (0.5%) eye was ungradable and 6 eyes did not complete ETDRS photography. No DME was found in 114 eyes (57.0%), DME was found in 28 eyes (14.0%), and clinically significant DME was found in 47 eyes (23.5%), and 11 (5.5%) eyes were ungradable. Exact DR severity agreement between ultrawide field 100-degree imaging and ETDRS photography occurred in 84%, with agreement within 1 level in 91% (K(W) = 0.85; K = 0.79). Nonmydriatic ultrawide field images exactly matched clinical examination results for DR in 70% and were within 1 level in 93% (K(W) = 0.71; K = 0.61). Nonmydriatic ultrawide field imaging acquisition time was less than half that of dilated ETDRS photography (P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Nonmydriatic ultrawide field images compare favorably with dilated ETDRS photography and dilated fundus examination in determining DR and DME severity; however, they are acquired more rapidly. If confirmed in broader diabetic populations, nonmydriatic ultrawide field imaging may prove to be beneficial in DR evaluation in research and clinical settings.

Для цитирования: Silva Paolo S, Cavallerano Jerry D, Sun Jennifer K, Noble Jason, Aiello Lloyd M, Aiello Lloyd Paul. Nonmydriatic ultrawide field retinal imaging compared with dilated standard 7-field 35-mm photography and retinal specialist examination for evaluation of diabetic retinopathy.. American journal of ophthalmology. 2012. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2012.03.019.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.