Witmer Matthew T, Parlitsis George, Patel Sarju, Kiss Szilárd
Department of Ophthalmology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
Clin Ophthalmol. 2013;7:389-94. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S41731. Epub 2013 Feb 21.
To compare ultra-widefield fluorescein angiography imaging using the Optos(®) Optomap(®) and the Heidelberg Spectralis(®) noncontact ultra-widefield module.
Five patients (ten eyes) underwent ultra-widefield fluorescein angiography using the Optos(®) panoramic P200Tx imaging system and the noncontact ultra-widefield module in the Heidelberg Spectralis(®) HRA+OCT system. The images were obtained as a single, nonsteered shot centered on the macula. The area of imaged retina was outlined and quantified using Adobe(®) Photoshop(®) C5 software. The total area and area within each of four visualized quadrants was calculated and compared between the two imaging modalities. Three masked reviewers also evaluated each quadrant per eye (40 total quadrants) to determine which modality imaged the retinal vasculature most peripherally.
Optos(®) imaging captured a total retinal area averaging 151,362 pixels, ranging from 116,998 to 205,833 pixels, while the area captured using the Heidelberg Spectralis(®) was 101,786 pixels, ranging from 73,424 to 116,319 (P = 0.0002). The average area per individual quadrant imaged by Optos(®) versus the Heidelberg Spectralis(®) superiorly was 32,373 vs 32,789 pixels, respectively (P = 0.91), inferiorly was 24,665 vs 26,117 pixels, respectively (P = 0.71), temporally was 47,948 vs 20,645 pixels, respectively (P = 0.0001), and nasally was 46,374 vs 22,234 pixels, respectively (P = 0.0001). The Heidelberg Spectralis(®) was able to image the superior and inferior retinal vasculature to a more distal point than was the Optos(®), in nine of ten eyes (18 of 20 quadrants). The Optos(®) was able to image the nasal and temporal retinal vasculature to a more distal point than was the Heidelberg Spectralis(®), in ten of ten eyes (20 of 20 quadrants).
The ultra-widefield fluorescein angiography obtained with the Optos(®) and Heidelberg Spectralis(®) ultra-widefield imaging systems are both excellent modalities that provide views of the peripheral retina. On a single nonsteered image, the Optos(®) Optomap(®) covered a significantly larger total retinal surface area, with greater image variability, than did the Heidelberg Spectralis(®) ultra-widefield module. The Optos(®) captured an appreciably wider view of the retina temporally and nasally, albeit with peripheral distortion, while the ultra-widefield Heidelberg Spectralis(®) module was able to image the superior and inferior retinal vasculature more peripherally. The clinical significance of these findings as well as the area imaged on steered montaged images remains to be determined.
比较使用Optos(®)Optomap(®)和海德堡Spectralis(®)非接触超广角模块进行的超广角荧光素血管造影成像。
五名患者(十只眼)使用Optos(®)全景P200Tx成像系统和海德堡Spectralis(®)HRA + OCT系统中的非接触超广角模块进行了超广角荧光素血管造影。图像以黄斑为中心单次非转向拍摄获得。使用Adobe(®)Photoshop(®)C5软件勾勒并量化成像视网膜的面积。计算并比较两种成像方式下的总面积以及四个可见象限中每个象限内的面积。三名盲法评估者还对每只眼的每个象限(共40个象限)进行评估,以确定哪种方式能最外周地成像视网膜血管系统。
Optos(®)成像捕获的视网膜总面积平均为151,362像素,范围为116,998至205,833像素,而使用海德堡Spectralis(®)捕获的面积为101,786像素,范围为73,424至116,319像素(P = 0.0002)。Optos(®)与海德堡Spectralis(®)相比,上方单个象限的平均成像面积分别为32,373像素和32,789像素(P = 0.91),下方分别为24,665像素和26,117像素(P = 0.71),颞侧分别为47,948像素和20,645像素(P = 0.0001),鼻侧分别为46,374像素和22,234像素(P = 0.0001)。在十只眼中的九只眼(20个象限中的18个),海德堡Spectralis(®)能够比Optos(®)更外周地成像视网膜上方和下方的血管系统。在十只眼中的十只眼(20个象限中的20个),Optos(®)能够比海德堡Spectralis(®)更外周地成像视网膜鼻侧和颞侧的血管系统。
使用Optos(®)和海德堡Spectralis(®)超广角成像系统获得的超广角荧光素血管造影都是提供周边视网膜视图的优秀方式。在单个非转向图像上,Optos(®)Optomap(®)覆盖的视网膜总表面积明显更大,图像变异性也更大,比海德堡Spectralis(®)超广角模块更大。Optos(®)在颞侧和鼻侧捕获的视网膜视野明显更宽,尽管存在周边畸变,而超广角海德堡Spectralis(®)模块能够更外周地成像视网膜上方和下方的血管系统。这些发现的临床意义以及在转向拼接图像上的成像面积仍有待确定。