Assessment of diabetic retinopathy using nonmydriatic ultra-widefield scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (Optomap) compared with ETDRS 7-field stereo photography.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the diagnostic properties of a nonmydriatic 200° ultra-widefield scanning laser ophthalmoscope (SLO) versus mydriatic Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) 7-field photography for diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A consecutive series of 212 eyes of 141 patients with different levels of DR were examined. Grading of DR and clinically significant macular edema (CSME) from mydriatic ETDRS 7-field stereo photography was compared with grading obtained by Optomap Panoramic 200 SLO images. All SLO scans were performed through an undilated pupil, and no additional clinical information was used for evaluation of all images by the two independent, masked, expert graders.

RESULTS

Twenty-two eyes from ETDRS 7-field photography and 12 eyes from Optomap were not gradable by at least one grader because of poor image quality. A total of 144 eyes were analyzed regarding DR level and 155 eyes regarding CSME. For ETDRS 7-field photography, 22 eyes (18 for grader 2) had no or mild DR (ETDRS levels ≤ 20) and 117 eyes (111 for grader 2) had no CSME. A highly substantial agreement between both Optomap DR and CSME grading and ETDRS 7-field photography existed with κ = 0.79 for DR and 0.73 for CSME for grader 1, and κ = 0.77 (DR) and 0.77 (CSME) for grader 2.

CONCLUSIONS

Determination of CSME and grading of DR level from Optomap Panoramic 200 nonmydriatic images show a positive correlation with mydriatic ETDRS 7-field stereo photography. Both techniques are of sufficient quality to assess DR and CSME. Optomap Panoramic 200 images cover a larger retinal area and therefore may offer additional diagnostic properties.