A comparison of quantitative mapping and stereoscopic fundus photography grading of retinal thickness in diabetic eyes with macular edema

Yunsik Yang, Susan Vitale, Yulan Ding, Stephen R. O'Connell, Judith Alexander, Neil M. Bressler, Andrew P. Schachat, Ran Zeimer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of a retina specialist's grading of 30° color stereoscopic fundus photographs to identify areas of significant retinal thickening as assessed by the Retinal Thickness Analyzer (RTA) and to determine whether this ability was affected by the presence of retinal pathology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-two eyes in 29 patients clinically diagnosed as having diabetic macular edema underwent RTA scanning and nonsimultaneous 30° color stereoscopic fundus photography. Retinal thickness maps of the macular area were generated, and regions with significant retinal thickening (≥2 SD above normal values) were identified. A retina specialist reader, masked to the RTA measurements, identified areas with macular edema on the stereoscopic fundus photographs, which subsequently were overlaid on the retinal thickness maps. The sensitivity (percent of significant retinal thickening areas identified by the retina specialist grading the stereoscopic fundus photographs) was calculated separately for areas with and without retinal pathology. Specificity of the stereoscopic fundus photograph grading was assessed similarly. RESULTS: The retina specialists stereoscopic fundus photography grading identified 78.8% of areas with significant retinal thickening (range over eyes: 20.4%-100%) and was slightly more likely to identify significant retinal thickening when pathology was present (89.6%) than when pathology was not present (78.4%; pooled risk ratio, 1.14 [95% CI=0.54, 2.42]). Specificity of stereoscopic fundus photography grading was 58%, ie, 42% of areas without significant retinal thickening were (incorrectly) identified as edematous by the stereoscopic fundus photograph grading. This misidentification was more likely if pathology was present (76.9%) than if pathology was not present (41.1%; pooled risk ratio, 1.87 [95% CI=1.28, 2.73]). CONCLUSION: This study shows the determination of macular edema by a retina specialist reading color stereoscopic fundus photographs is sensitive but not specific with reference to edema identified by the RTA. Furthermore, the presence of retinopathy tends to cause false-positive readings with reference to edema identified by the RTA. These findings indicate the need to use objective, quantitative methods in clinical studies to detect and monitor macular edema.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)7-16
Number of pages10
JournalOphthalmic Surgery Lasers and Imaging
Volume34
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 2003

Fingerprint

Macular Edema
Photography
Retina
Pathology
Papilledema
Color
Reading
Odds Ratio
Reference Values

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

Yang, Y., Vitale, S., Ding, Y., O'Connell, S. R., Alexander, J., Bressler, N. M., ... Zeimer, R. (2003). A comparison of quantitative mapping and stereoscopic fundus photography grading of retinal thickness in diabetic eyes with macular edema. Ophthalmic Surgery Lasers and Imaging, 34(1), 7-16.

A comparison of quantitative mapping and stereoscopic fundus photography grading of retinal thickness in diabetic eyes with macular edema. / Yang, Yunsik; Vitale, Susan; Ding, Yulan; O'Connell, Stephen R.; Alexander, Judith; Bressler, Neil M.; Schachat, Andrew P.; Zeimer, Ran.

In: Ophthalmic Surgery Lasers and Imaging, Vol. 34, No. 1, 01.2003, p. 7-16.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Yang, Y, Vitale, S, Ding, Y, O'Connell, SR, Alexander, J, Bressler, NM, Schachat, AP & Zeimer, R 2003, 'A comparison of quantitative mapping and stereoscopic fundus photography grading of retinal thickness in diabetic eyes with macular edema', Ophthalmic Surgery Lasers and Imaging, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 7-16.
Yang, Yunsik ; Vitale, Susan ; Ding, Yulan ; O'Connell, Stephen R. ; Alexander, Judith ; Bressler, Neil M. ; Schachat, Andrew P. ; Zeimer, Ran. / A comparison of quantitative mapping and stereoscopic fundus photography grading of retinal thickness in diabetic eyes with macular edema. In: Ophthalmic Surgery Lasers and Imaging. 2003 ; Vol. 34, No. 1. pp. 7-16.
@article{90e100e4adc7421a84654136f3f02741,
title = "A comparison of quantitative mapping and stereoscopic fundus photography grading of retinal thickness in diabetic eyes with macular edema",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of a retina specialist's grading of 30° color stereoscopic fundus photographs to identify areas of significant retinal thickening as assessed by the Retinal Thickness Analyzer (RTA) and to determine whether this ability was affected by the presence of retinal pathology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-two eyes in 29 patients clinically diagnosed as having diabetic macular edema underwent RTA scanning and nonsimultaneous 30° color stereoscopic fundus photography. Retinal thickness maps of the macular area were generated, and regions with significant retinal thickening (≥2 SD above normal values) were identified. A retina specialist reader, masked to the RTA measurements, identified areas with macular edema on the stereoscopic fundus photographs, which subsequently were overlaid on the retinal thickness maps. The sensitivity (percent of significant retinal thickening areas identified by the retina specialist grading the stereoscopic fundus photographs) was calculated separately for areas with and without retinal pathology. Specificity of the stereoscopic fundus photograph grading was assessed similarly. RESULTS: The retina specialists stereoscopic fundus photography grading identified 78.8{\%} of areas with significant retinal thickening (range over eyes: 20.4{\%}-100{\%}) and was slightly more likely to identify significant retinal thickening when pathology was present (89.6{\%}) than when pathology was not present (78.4{\%}; pooled risk ratio, 1.14 [95{\%} CI=0.54, 2.42]). Specificity of stereoscopic fundus photography grading was 58{\%}, ie, 42{\%} of areas without significant retinal thickening were (incorrectly) identified as edematous by the stereoscopic fundus photograph grading. This misidentification was more likely if pathology was present (76.9{\%}) than if pathology was not present (41.1{\%}; pooled risk ratio, 1.87 [95{\%} CI=1.28, 2.73]). CONCLUSION: This study shows the determination of macular edema by a retina specialist reading color stereoscopic fundus photographs is sensitive but not specific with reference to edema identified by the RTA. Furthermore, the presence of retinopathy tends to cause false-positive readings with reference to edema identified by the RTA. These findings indicate the need to use objective, quantitative methods in clinical studies to detect and monitor macular edema.",
author = "Yunsik Yang and Susan Vitale and Yulan Ding and O'Connell, {Stephen R.} and Judith Alexander and Bressler, {Neil M.} and Schachat, {Andrew P.} and Ran Zeimer",
year = "2003",
month = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "34",
pages = "7--16",
journal = "Ophthalmic Surgery Lasers and Imaging Retina",
issn = "2325-8160",
publisher = "Slack Incorporated",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of quantitative mapping and stereoscopic fundus photography grading of retinal thickness in diabetic eyes with macular edema

AU - Yang, Yunsik

AU - Vitale, Susan

AU - Ding, Yulan

AU - O'Connell, Stephen R.

AU - Alexander, Judith

AU - Bressler, Neil M.

AU - Schachat, Andrew P.

AU - Zeimer, Ran

PY - 2003/1

Y1 - 2003/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of a retina specialist's grading of 30° color stereoscopic fundus photographs to identify areas of significant retinal thickening as assessed by the Retinal Thickness Analyzer (RTA) and to determine whether this ability was affected by the presence of retinal pathology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-two eyes in 29 patients clinically diagnosed as having diabetic macular edema underwent RTA scanning and nonsimultaneous 30° color stereoscopic fundus photography. Retinal thickness maps of the macular area were generated, and regions with significant retinal thickening (≥2 SD above normal values) were identified. A retina specialist reader, masked to the RTA measurements, identified areas with macular edema on the stereoscopic fundus photographs, which subsequently were overlaid on the retinal thickness maps. The sensitivity (percent of significant retinal thickening areas identified by the retina specialist grading the stereoscopic fundus photographs) was calculated separately for areas with and without retinal pathology. Specificity of the stereoscopic fundus photograph grading was assessed similarly. RESULTS: The retina specialists stereoscopic fundus photography grading identified 78.8% of areas with significant retinal thickening (range over eyes: 20.4%-100%) and was slightly more likely to identify significant retinal thickening when pathology was present (89.6%) than when pathology was not present (78.4%; pooled risk ratio, 1.14 [95% CI=0.54, 2.42]). Specificity of stereoscopic fundus photography grading was 58%, ie, 42% of areas without significant retinal thickening were (incorrectly) identified as edematous by the stereoscopic fundus photograph grading. This misidentification was more likely if pathology was present (76.9%) than if pathology was not present (41.1%; pooled risk ratio, 1.87 [95% CI=1.28, 2.73]). CONCLUSION: This study shows the determination of macular edema by a retina specialist reading color stereoscopic fundus photographs is sensitive but not specific with reference to edema identified by the RTA. Furthermore, the presence of retinopathy tends to cause false-positive readings with reference to edema identified by the RTA. These findings indicate the need to use objective, quantitative methods in clinical studies to detect and monitor macular edema.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of a retina specialist's grading of 30° color stereoscopic fundus photographs to identify areas of significant retinal thickening as assessed by the Retinal Thickness Analyzer (RTA) and to determine whether this ability was affected by the presence of retinal pathology. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-two eyes in 29 patients clinically diagnosed as having diabetic macular edema underwent RTA scanning and nonsimultaneous 30° color stereoscopic fundus photography. Retinal thickness maps of the macular area were generated, and regions with significant retinal thickening (≥2 SD above normal values) were identified. A retina specialist reader, masked to the RTA measurements, identified areas with macular edema on the stereoscopic fundus photographs, which subsequently were overlaid on the retinal thickness maps. The sensitivity (percent of significant retinal thickening areas identified by the retina specialist grading the stereoscopic fundus photographs) was calculated separately for areas with and without retinal pathology. Specificity of the stereoscopic fundus photograph grading was assessed similarly. RESULTS: The retina specialists stereoscopic fundus photography grading identified 78.8% of areas with significant retinal thickening (range over eyes: 20.4%-100%) and was slightly more likely to identify significant retinal thickening when pathology was present (89.6%) than when pathology was not present (78.4%; pooled risk ratio, 1.14 [95% CI=0.54, 2.42]). Specificity of stereoscopic fundus photography grading was 58%, ie, 42% of areas without significant retinal thickening were (incorrectly) identified as edematous by the stereoscopic fundus photograph grading. This misidentification was more likely if pathology was present (76.9%) than if pathology was not present (41.1%; pooled risk ratio, 1.87 [95% CI=1.28, 2.73]). CONCLUSION: This study shows the determination of macular edema by a retina specialist reading color stereoscopic fundus photographs is sensitive but not specific with reference to edema identified by the RTA. Furthermore, the presence of retinopathy tends to cause false-positive readings with reference to edema identified by the RTA. These findings indicate the need to use objective, quantitative methods in clinical studies to detect and monitor macular edema.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=10644292179&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=10644292179&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 34

SP - 7

EP - 16

JO - Ophthalmic Surgery Lasers and Imaging Retina

JF - Ophthalmic Surgery Lasers and Imaging Retina

SN - 2325-8160

IS - 1

ER -