Conventional Microscope-Integrated Intraoperative OCT Versus Digitally Enabled Intraoperative OCT in Vitreoretinal Surgery in the DISCOVER Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To compare conventional microscope-integrated intraoperative optical coherence tomography (iOCT) and digitally enabled microscope-integrated iOCT in vitreoretinal surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this post-hoc analysis of the DISCOVER prospective iOCT study, two surgical groups were compared: (1) conventional iOCT and (2) digitally enabled iOCT. Surgeon questionnaires were collected immediately following surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 187 subjects were included in the study: 91 in the conventional iOCT group and 96 in the digitally enabled iOCT group. There were no differences in surgeon-perceived iOCT utility between the two groups. There was significantly higher surgical field-based visualization of the iOCT datastream in the digitally enabled iOCT group (67.7% vs. 3.3%; P < .0001). Reported significant back discomfort (1.0% vs. 18.7%; P < .0001) and headaches (5.2% vs. 20.9%; P < .002) were lower in the digitally enabled iOCT group.

CONCLUSIONS

Feasibility and utility of iOCT were similar in both groups. Digitally enabled iOCT datastream enabled increased attention on the surgical field during OCT review. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina. 2020;51:S37-S43.].