Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of Drusen Volume Assessed by Two Different OCT Devices.
Beck, Marco; Joshi, Devika S; Berger, Lieselotte; Klose, Gerd; De Zanet, Sandro; Mosinska, Agata; Apostolopoulos, Stefanos; Ebneter, Andreas; Zinkernagel, Martin S; Wolf, Sebastian; Munk, Marion R.
Afiliación
  • Beck M; Department of Ophthalmology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.
  • Joshi DS; Department of Ophthalmology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.
  • Berger L; Department of Ophthalmology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.
  • Klose G; Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., Tokyo 102-0083, Japan.
  • De Zanet S; RetinAI Medical AG, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.
  • Mosinska A; RetinAI Medical AG, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.
  • Apostolopoulos S; RetinAI Medical AG, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.
  • Ebneter A; Department of Ophthalmology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.
  • Zinkernagel MS; Department of Ophthalmology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.
  • Wolf S; Department of Ophthalmology, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.
  • Munk MR; Bern Photographic Reading Center, Inselspital, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, 3010 Bern, Switzerland.
J Clin Med ; 9(8)2020 Aug 17.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32824455
To compare drusen volume between Heidelberg Spectral Domain (SD-) and Zeiss Swept-Source (SS) PlexElite Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) determined by manual and automated segmentation methods. Thirty-two eyes of 24 patients with Age-Related Macular Degeneration (AMD) and drusen maculopathy were included. In the central 1 and 3 mm ETDRS circle drusen volumes were calculated and compared. Drusen segmentation was performed using automated manufacturer algorithms of the two OCT devices. Then, the automated segmentation was manually corrected and compared and finally analyzed using customized software. Though on SD-OCT, there was a significant difference of mean drusen volume prior to and after manual correction (mean difference: 0.0188 ± 0.0269 mm3, p < 0.001, corr. p < 0.001, correlation of r = 0.90), there was no difference found on SS-OCT (mean difference: 0.0001 ± 0.0003 mm3, p = 0.262, corr. p = 0.524, r = 1.0). Heidelberg-acquired mean drusen volume after manual correction was significantly different from Zeiss-acquired drusen volume after manual correction (mean difference: 0.1231 ± 0.0371 mm3, p < 0.001, corr. p < 0.001, r = 0.68). Using customized software, the difference of measurements between both devices decreased and correlation among the measurements improved (mean difference: 0.0547 ± 0.0744 mm3, p = 0.02, corr. p = 0.08, r = 0.937). Heidelberg SD-OCT, the Zeiss PlexElite SS-OCT, and customized software all measured significantly different drusen volumes. Therefore, devices/algorithms may not be interchangeable. Third-party customized software helps to minimize differences, which may allow a pooling of data of different devices, e.g., in multicenter trials.
Palabras clave
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Clin Med Año: 2020 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Suiza Pais de publicación: Suiza
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Clin Med Año: 2020 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Suiza Pais de publicación: Suiza