3 years ago

Comparison of Short-Wavelength Reduced-Illuminance and Conventional Autofluorescence Imaging in Stargardt Macular Dystrophy

To compare grading results between short-wavelength reduced-illuminance and conventional autofluorescence imaging in Stargardt macular dystrophy. Design Reliability study. Methods setting : Moorfields Eye Hospital, London (United Kingdom). patients : Eighteen patients (18 eyes) with Stargardt macular dystrophy. observation procedures : A series of 3 fundus autofluorescence images using 3 different acquisition parameters on a custom-patched device were obtained: (1) 25% laser power and total sensitivity 87; (2) 25% laser power and freely adjusted sensitivity; and (3) 100% laser power and freely adjusted total sensitivity (conventional). The total area of 2 hypoautofluorescent lesion types (definitely decreased autofluorescence and poorly demarcated questionably decreased autofluorescence) was measured. main outcome measures : Agreement in grading between the 3 imaging methods was assessed by kappa coefficients (κ) and intraclass correlation coefficients. Results The mean ± standard deviation area for images acquired with 25% laser power and freely adjusted total sensitivity was 2.04 ± 1.87 mm2 for definitely decreased autofluorescence (n = 15) and 1.86 ± 2.14 mm2 for poorly demarcated questionably decreased autofluorescence (n = 12). The intraclass correlation coefficient (95% confidence interval) was 0.964 (0.929, 0.999) for definitely decreased autofluorescence and 0.268 (0.000, 0.730) for poorly demarcated questionably decreased autofluorescence. Conclusions Short-wavelength reduced-illuminance and conventional fundus autofluorescence imaging showed good concordance in assessing areas of definitely decreased autofluorescence. However, there was significantly higher variability between imaging modalities for assessing areas of poorly demarcated questionably decreased autofluorescence.

Publisher URL: www.sciencedirect.com/science

DOI: S0002939416302677

You might also like
Discover & Discuss Important Research

Keeping up-to-date with research can feel impossible, with papers being published faster than you'll ever be able to read them. That's where Researcher comes in: we're simplifying discovery and making important discussions happen. With over 19,000 sources, including peer-reviewed journals, preprints, blogs, universities, podcasts and Live events across 10 research areas, you'll never miss what's important to you. It's like social media, but better. Oh, and we should mention - it's free.

  • Download from Google Play
  • Download from App Store
  • Download from AppInChina

Researcher displays publicly available abstracts and doesn’t host any full article content. If the content is open access, we will direct clicks from the abstracts to the publisher website and display the PDF copy on our platform. Clicks to view the full text will be directed to the publisher website, where only users with subscriptions or access through their institution are able to view the full article.