Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University and King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.
Department of Ophthalmology, Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2023 Aug 1;12(8):7. doi: 10.1167/tvst.12.8.7.
This prospective study evaluated the agreement among four optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) devices in the assessment of radial peripapillary capillary (RPC) density.
The study included 48 eyes of 48 subjects (14 healthy, 19 glaucomatous, and 15 non-glaucomatous optic neuropathy). Each participant was scanned using four OCTA devices in a random sequence: RTVue XR Avanti (RTVue), DRI OCT Triton (Triton), Revo NX 130 (Revo), and PLEX Elite 9000 (PlexE). All 6 × 6-mm grayscale OCTA images from each device were analyzed for RPC density using a customized algorithm. Agreement between each pair of devices was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman plots.
There was a poor correlation between devices in all comparisons (RTVue-Triton, ICC = 0.34; RTVue-Revo, ICC = 0.31; RTVue-PlexE, ICC = 0.28; Triton-Revo, ICC = 0.31; Triton-PlexE, ICC = 0.17; Revo-PlexE, ICC = 0.34). Significant proportional biases (P < 0.05) and wide limits of agreement with apparent constant biases were identified in all comparisons. The mean difference was greatest for the RTVue-Revo pair (-49.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -52.9 to -45.8) and smallest for the Triton-PlexE pair (-7.7%; 95% CI, -10.1 to -5.3).
The RPC densities obtained from each device had poor inter-device agreement and significant biases and cannot be used interchangeably.
RPC density obtained from different OCTA devices is not interchangeable; thus, the progression of optic neuropathy should be monitored using the same OCTA device.
本前瞻性研究评估了四种光学相干断层扫描血管造影（OCTA）设备在评估放射状视神经纤维层毛细血管（RPC）密度方面的一致性。
该研究纳入了 48 只眼的 48 名受试者（14 名健康者、19 名青光眼患者和 15 名非青光眼性视神经病变患者）。每位受试者按随机顺序分别接受四种 OCTA 设备扫描：RTVue XR Avanti（RTVue）、DRI OCT Triton（Triton）、Revo NX 130（Revo）和 PLEX Elite 9000（PlexE）。使用定制算法分析来自每种设备的所有 6×6mm 灰度 OCTA 图像的 RPC 密度。使用组内相关系数（ICCs）和 Bland-Altman 图评估每种设备两两之间的一致性。
在所有比较中，设备之间的相关性均较差（RTVue-Triton，ICC=0.34；RTVue-Revo，ICC=0.31；RTVue-PlexE，ICC=0.28；Triton-Revo，ICC=0.31；Triton-PlexE，ICC=0.17；Revo-PlexE，ICC=0.34）。所有比较均存在明显的比例偏差（P<0.05）和一致性界限宽且存在明显的恒定偏差。RTVue-Revo 对之间的平均差异最大（-49.3%；95%置信区间[CI]，-52.9 至-45.8），Triton-PlexE 对之间的平均差异最小（-7.7%；95%CI，-10.1 至-5.3）。
每种设备获得的 RPC 密度之间的设备间一致性较差，且存在明显的偏差，不能互换使用。
这是一篇医学相关的研究论文，主要探讨了四种不同的光学相干断层扫描血管造影（OCTA）设备在评估放射状视神经纤维层毛细血管（RPC）密度方面的一致性。研究结果表明，不同设备之间的 RPC 密度存在较大差异，不能相互替换使用。因此，在监测视神经病变的进展时，应该使用同一种 OCTA 设备。
