Suppr超能文献

使用光学相干断层扫描血管造影机检测健康眼睛的黄斑中心凹血管区和毛细血管密度的变异性

VARIABILITY IN FOVEAL AVASCULAR ZONE AND CAPILLARY DENSITY USING OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY ANGIOGRAPHY MACHINES IN HEALTHY EYES.

作者信息

Magrath George N, Say Emil Anthony T, Sioufi Kareem, Ferenczy Sandor, Samara Wasim A, Shields Carol L

机构信息

Ocular Oncology Service, Wills Eye Hospital, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

出版信息

Retina. 2017 Nov;37(11):2102-2111. doi: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000001458.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate the variability in foveal avascular zone (FAZ) and capillary density measurements on optical coherence tomography angiography using Optovue RTVue XR Avanti (OA) (Optovue) and Zeiss Cirrus HD-OCT 5000 (ZC) (Carl Zeiss Meditec).

METHODS

In this prospective, comparative case series, parafoveal (3 × 3 mm) optical coherence tomography angiography scans were obtained on healthy volunteers using both the Avanti and Cirrus. The FAZ area and capillary density at the level of both the superficial and deep capillary plexus were measured automatically using the built-in ReVue software (Optovue) with the Avanti as well as manually using ImageJ (National Institutes of Health) with both machines.

RESULTS

There were 50 eyes in 25 healthy volunteers included in the analysis. Mean subject age was 33 years and there were 14 women (56%). On optical coherence tomography, mean central macular thickness was significantly greater on OA (259.1 μm) than ZC (257.6 μm, P = 0.0228). On optical coherence tomography angiography, mean superficial and deep plexus FAZ measured 0.2855 mm and 0.3465 mm on Avanti automated (A-A), 0.2739 mm and 0.3637 mm on Avanti manual (A-M), and 0.2657 mm and 0.3993 mm on Cirrus manual (C-M), respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in superficial plexus FAZ measurements between the A-A and A-M (P = 0.4019) or A-A and C-M (P = 0.1336). The A-M measured significantly larger than C-M (P = 0.0396). Deep plexus FAZ measurements were similar on A-A and A-M (P = 0.6299), but both were significantly less compared with C-M (P < 0.0001 for A-A vs. C-M, P = 0.0184 for A-M vs. C-M). Mean superficial and deep plexus capillary densities were 53.6% and 59.3% on A-A, 48.1% and 47.7% on A-M, and 52.5% and 48.1% on C-M, respectively. Superficial plexus capillary density measurements were statistically similar on A-A and C-M (P = 0.0623), but both were significantly higher than A-M (P < 0.0001 for A-A vs. A-M, P < 0.0001 for A-M vs. C-M). However, deep plexus capillary density measurements on A-A were significantly higher than A-M (P < 0.0001) and C-M (P < 0.0001), but A-M and C-M measurements were similar (P = 0.5986). There was no significant difference in all parameters measured in both eyes of one subject using any of the three measuring techniques.

CONCLUSION

While measurements taken with the same machine and technique are consistent and reliable between fellow eyes, significant variability exists in FAZ and capillary density measurements among different machines and techniques. Comparison of measurements across machines and techniques should be considered with caution.

摘要

目的

使用Optovue RTVue XR Avanti(OA)(Optovue公司)和蔡司Cirrus HD-OCT 5000(ZC)(卡尔·蔡司医疗技术公司)评估光学相干断层扫描血管造影中黄斑无血管区(FAZ)和毛细血管密度测量的变异性。

方法

在这个前瞻性、比较性病例系列研究中,使用Avanti和Cirrus对健康志愿者进行黄斑旁(3×3毫米)光学相干断层扫描血管造影扫描。使用Avanti的内置ReVue软件(Optovue公司)自动测量FAZ面积以及浅层和深层毛细血管丛水平的毛细血管密度,同时使用ImageJ(美国国立卫生研究院)手动测量两台机器的数据。

结果

分析纳入了25名健康志愿者的50只眼。受试者平均年龄为33岁,女性14名(56%)。在光学相干断层扫描中,OA测量的平均中心黄斑厚度(259.1微米)显著大于ZC(257.6微米,P = 0.0228)。在光学相干断层扫描血管造影中,Avanti自动测量(A-A)的浅层和深层丛FAZ平均分别为0.2855毫米和0.3465毫米,Avanti手动测量(A-M)分别为0.2739毫米和0.3637毫米,Cirrus手动测量(C-M)分别为0.2657毫米和0.3993毫米。A-A和A-M之间(P = 0.4019)以及A-A和C-M之间(P = 0.1336)浅层丛FAZ测量无统计学显著差异。A-M测量值显著大于C-M(P = 0.0396)。A-A和A-M的深层丛FAZ测量值相似(P = 0.6299),但与C-M相比均显著更小(A-A与C-M相比,P < 0.0001;A-M与C-M相比,P = 0.0184)。A-A的浅层和深层丛毛细血管密度平均值分别为53.6%和59.3%,A-M分别为48.1%和47.7%,C-M分别为52.5%和48.1%。A-A和C-M的浅层丛毛细血管密度测量在统计学上相似(P = 0.0623),但均显著高于A-M(A-A与A-M相比,P < 0.0001;A-M与C-M相比,P < 0.0001)。然而,A-A的深层丛毛细血管密度测量值显著高于A-M(P < 0.0001)和C-M(P < 0.0001),但A-M和C-M测量值相似(P = 0.5986)。使用三种测量技术中的任何一种对一名受试者的双眼进行测量,所有参数均无显著差异。

结论

虽然同一台机器和技术进行的测量在双眼之间是一致且可靠的,但不同机器和技术之间的FAZ和毛细血管密度测量存在显著变异性。跨机器和技术的测量比较应谨慎考虑。

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