Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 1999
Independent diagnostic value of fluorescein angiography in the evaluation of intraocular tumors.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
Meyer K, Augsburger J J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Fluorescein angiography has been used in the clinical evaluation of suspected neoplastic lesions of the ocular fundus for over 30 years. Yet, the independent diagnostic value of this photographic technique in patients with suspected intraocular neoplasms has never been determined.
METHODS: The authors evaluated color fundus photographs and fluorescein angiograms of 50 mass lesions of the ocular fundus. The cases were chosen to reflect a broad spectrum of lesions, including choroidal malignant melanoma, choroidal nevus, circumscribed choroidal hemangioma, metastatic carcinoma to the choroid, miscellaneous other neoplasms, hamartomas, or choristomas, and non-neoplastic lesions simulating neoplasms. Ten experienced retinal specialists independently reviewed the angiograms (presented in random order without the corresponding color fundus photographs) and rendered a diagnosis. Approximately 1 month later, each retinal specialist independently reviewed the color fundus slides (presented in a different random order without the corresponding fluorescein angiograms) and again rendered a diagnosis for each lesion.
RESULTS: The accuracy of angiographic diagnosis by the different reviewers ranged from 16% to 56% (average 45.4%), while that based on review of the color fundus slides ranged from 32% to 78% (average 59.0%). This difference is statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: Fluorescein angiography alone did not appear to be a reliable method for establishing the clinical diagnosis of neoplasms and simulating lesions of the ocular fundus.
METHODS: The authors evaluated color fundus photographs and fluorescein angiograms of 50 mass lesions of the ocular fundus. The cases were chosen to reflect a broad spectrum of lesions, including choroidal malignant melanoma, choroidal nevus, circumscribed choroidal hemangioma, metastatic carcinoma to the choroid, miscellaneous other neoplasms, hamartomas, or choristomas, and non-neoplastic lesions simulating neoplasms. Ten experienced retinal specialists independently reviewed the angiograms (presented in random order without the corresponding color fundus photographs) and rendered a diagnosis. Approximately 1 month later, each retinal specialist independently reviewed the color fundus slides (presented in a different random order without the corresponding fluorescein angiograms) and again rendered a diagnosis for each lesion.
RESULTS: The accuracy of angiographic diagnosis by the different reviewers ranged from 16% to 56% (average 45.4%), while that based on review of the color fundus slides ranged from 32% to 78% (average 59.0%). This difference is statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: Fluorescein angiography alone did not appear to be a reliable method for establishing the clinical diagnosis of neoplasms and simulating lesions of the ocular fundus.