Suppr超能文献

通过远程眼科识别具有临床意义的黄斑水肿时立体视觉的益处。

Benefits of stereopsis when identifying clinically significant macular edema via teleophthalmology.

作者信息

Rudnisky Christopher J, Tennant Matthew T S, de Leon Alexander R, Hinz Bradley J, Greve Mark D J

机构信息

Department of Opthalmology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

出版信息

Can J Ophthalmol. 2006 Dec;41(6):727-32. doi: 10.3129/i06-066.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The need to incorporate stereopsis into a teleophthalmology system is controversial. Detection of hard exudate in the macula is suggested by some as an adequate surrogate for direct observation of retinal thickening. This study was designed to determine how accurate the detection of hard exudate is as a surrogate for stereoscopic detection of clinically significant macular edema (CSME).

METHODS

120 patients with diabetes underwent clinical retinal examination with contact-lens biomicroscopy by a retinal specialist. The presence or absence of CSME was recorded. On the same day as clinical grading, 30 degrees stereoscopic digital photographs of the macula were captured. At least 2 months after clinical examination, the digital images were viewed by masked graders for the presence or absence of hard exudate and retinal thickening.

RESULTS

207 eyes of 106 patients had complete data sets for both diagnostic modalities. The sensitivity of hard exudate (93.9%) in predicting the presence of CSME was similar to that of direct stereoscopic observation of retinal thickening (90.9%), with p = 0.5. On the other hand, digital stereopsis was significantly more specific (92.9%) than was hard exudate (81.6%) in predicting the presence of CSME (p < 0.001). This difference was maintained even when controlling for image quality.

INTERPRETATION

Although the presence of hard exudate within the macula is a sensitive surrogate marker for CSME, it is less specific than stereoscopic evaluation. Any American Telemedicine Association category 3 teleophthalmology system that utilizes hard exudate as a surrogate marker for CSME may refer patients unnecessarily for clinical evaluation.

摘要

背景

将立体视觉纳入远程眼科系统的必要性存在争议。一些人认为检测黄斑区硬性渗出物可作为直接观察视网膜增厚的适当替代方法。本研究旨在确定将硬性渗出物的检测作为临床显著性黄斑水肿(CSME)立体检测替代方法的准确性。

方法

120例糖尿病患者由视网膜专科医生通过接触镜生物显微镜进行临床视网膜检查。记录是否存在CSME。在临床分级的同一天,拍摄黄斑区30度立体数码照片。临床检查至少2个月后,由不知情的评分者查看数码图像,判断是否存在硬性渗出物和视网膜增厚。

结果

106例患者的207只眼中有两种诊断方式的完整数据集。硬性渗出物预测CSME存在的敏感性(93.9%)与直接立体观察视网膜增厚的敏感性(90.9%)相似,p = 0.5。另一方面,在预测CSME存在方面,数码立体视觉的特异性(92.9%)明显高于硬性渗出物(81.6%)(p < 0.001)。即使在控制图像质量时,这种差异仍然存在。

解读

虽然黄斑区内硬性渗出物的存在是CSME的一个敏感替代标志物,但其特异性低于立体评估。任何将硬性渗出物用作CSME替代标志物的美国远程医疗协会3类远程眼科系统可能会不必要地将患者转诊进行临床评估。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验