Kanclerz Piotr, Tuuminen Raimo, Khoramnia Ramin
Hygeia Clinic, 80-286 Gdańsk, Poland.
Helsinki Retina Research Group, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, 00014 Helsinki, Finland.
Diagnostics (Basel). 2021 Sep 29;11(10):1802. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics11101802.
Urbanization has caused dramatic changes in lifestyle, and these rapid transitions have led to an increased risk of noncommunicable diseases, such as type 2 diabetes. In terms of cost-effectiveness, screening for diabetic retinopathy is a critical aspect in diabetes management. The aim of this study was to review the imaging modalities employed for retinal examination in diabetic retinopathy screening.
The PubMed and Web of Science databases were the main sources used to investigate the medical literature. An extensive search was performed to identify relevant articles concerning "imaging", "diabetic retinopathy" and "screening" up to 1 June 2021. Imaging techniques were divided into the following: (i) mydriatic fundus photography, (ii) non-mydriatic fundus photography, (iii) smartphone-based imaging, and (iv) ultrawide-field imaging. A meta-analysis was performed to analyze the performance and technical failure rate of each method.
The technical failure rates for mydriatic and non-mydriatic digital fundus photography, smartphone-based and ultrawide-field imaging were 3.4% (95% CI: 2.3-4.6%), 12.1% (95% CI: 5.4-18.7%), 5.3% (95% CI: 1.5-9.0%) and 2.2% (95% CI: 0.3-4.0%), respectively. The rate was significantly different between all analyzed techniques ( < 0.001), and the overall failure rate was 6.6% (4.9-8.3%; I = 97.2%). The publication bias factor for smartphone-based imaging was significantly higher than for mydriatic digital fundus photography and non-mydriatic digital fundus photography (b = -8.61, b = -2.59 and b = -7.03, respectively; < 0.001). Ultrawide-field imaging studies were excluded from the final sensitivity/specificity analysis, as the total number of patients included was too small.
Regardless of the type of the device used, retinal photographs should be taken on eyes with dilated pupils, unless contraindicated, as this setting decreases the rate of ungradable images. Smartphone-based and ultrawide-field imaging may become potential alternative methods for optimized DR screening; however, there is not yet enough evidence for these techniques to displace mydriatic fundus photography.
城市化已导致生活方式发生巨大变化,而这些快速转变致使非传染性疾病(如2型糖尿病)的风险增加。就成本效益而言,糖尿病视网膜病变筛查是糖尿病管理的一个关键方面。本研究的目的是回顾糖尿病视网膜病变筛查中用于视网膜检查的成像方式。
PubMed和Web of Science数据库是用于检索医学文献的主要来源。进行了广泛搜索,以识别截至2021年6月1日有关“成像”“糖尿病视网膜病变”和“筛查”的相关文章。成像技术分为以下几类:(i)散瞳眼底摄影,(ii)免散瞳眼底摄影,(iii)基于智能手机的成像,以及(iv)超广角成像。进行荟萃分析以分析每种方法的性能和技术失败率。
散瞳和免散瞳数字眼底摄影、基于智能手机的成像以及超广角成像的技术失败率分别为3.4%(95%CI:2.3 - 4.6%)、12.1%(95%CI:5.4 - 18.7%)、5.3%(95%CI:1.5 - 9.0%)和2.2%(95%CI:0.3 - 4.0%)。所有分析技术之间的比率差异显著(<0.001),总体失败率为6.6%(4.9 - 8.3%;I² = 97.2%)。基于智能手机的成像的发表偏倚因子显著高于散瞳数字眼底摄影和免散瞳数字眼底摄影(b分别为 - 8.61、 - 2.59和 - 7.03;<0.001)。超广角成像研究被排除在最终的敏感性/特异性分析之外,因为纳入的患者总数太少。
无论使用何种设备类型,除非有禁忌证,否则应在散瞳的眼睛上拍摄视网膜照片,因为这种情况下不可分级图像的发生率会降低。基于智能手机的成像和超广角成像可能成为优化糖尿病视网膜病变筛查的潜在替代方法;然而,尚无足够证据表明这些技术能取代散瞳眼底摄影。