1.
Repeatability and reproducibility of retinal thickness measurements in diabetic patients with spectral domain optical coherence tomography.
Fiore, T, Androudi, S, Iaccheri, B, Lupidi, M, Giansanti, F, Fruttini, D, Biondi, L, Cagini, C
Current eye research. 2013;(6):674-9
Abstract
BACKGROUND To determine the repeatability and reproducibility of optical coherence tomography (OCT) Spectralis retinal thickness measurements in diabetic patients with clinically significant macular edema (CSME). METHODS Twelve eyes of 12 volunteers (without macular pathology - control group) and 21 eyes of 21 diabetic patients with CSME were included in the study. Reproducibility, repeatability, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and intrasession correlation coefficients were tested with 20 × 15 degree raster scans consisting of 19 high-resolution line scans that were repeated three times by two experienced examiners. RESULTS In the control group, examining all regions, coefficient of repeatability was less than 1.1%, while coefficient of reproducibility was less than 2.2%. In diabetic patients, examining all regions, coefficient of repeatability was less than 2.6%, while coefficient of reproducibility was less than 2.4%. ICCs were, respectively, greater than or equal to 0.98 in the control group and 0.99 in diabetic patients. Intrasession coefficients of variation were less than 0.4% in the control group and less than 0.5% in diabetic patients. CONCLUSION Retinal thickness measurements are repeatable and reproducible with OCT Spectralis in both the control group and diabetic patients. The results indicate that a change in central subfield thickness exceeding 12 µm and 3% in the diabetic patients is likely to be real.
2.
Entoptic perimetry screening for central diabetic scotomas and macular edema.
Brown, JC, Kylstra, JA, Mah, ML
Ophthalmology. 2000;(4):755-9
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to compare entoptic perimetry, using conventional television, to Amsler grid and patient-reported visual loss for the detection of functional diabetic maculopathy and macular edema. DESIGN Observational case series. PARTICIPANTS A single eye from each of 104 consecutive patients with diabetes in an academic retina clinic. INTERVENTION Each eye was screened by Amsler grid, entoptic perimetry, and Humphrey 10-2 threshold visual field testing (HVF 10-2; Humphrey Instruments Inc., San Leandro, CA) in random order. Eyes were then examined clinically. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The presence or absence of new visual decline since the patient's last clinical examination, the presence or absence of central visual field abnormalities using an Amsler grid, entoptic perimetry, HVF 10-2, and the presence or absence of clinically significant macular edema (CSME). RESULTS The sensitivities and specificities for the detection of central diabetic scotomas as evidenced by HVF 10-2 abnormalities were: subjective impression, 31 of 90 eyes (34.4%) and 11 of 14 eyes (78.6%); Amsler grid, 29 of 90 eyes (32.2%) and 13 of 14 eyes (92.9%); and entoptic perimetry, 58 of 90 eyes (64.4%) and 11 of 14 eyes (78.6%). Entoptic perimetry was statistically more sensitive than both subjective impression (P < 0.001) and Amsler grid (P < 0.001), but the specificities were statistically indistinguishable. The sensitivities and specificities for the detection of CSME were: subjective impression, 6 of 24 eyes (25.0%) and 52 of 80 eyes (65.0%); Amsler grid, 9 of 24 eyes (37.5%) and 59 of 80 eyes (73.8%); and entoptic perimetry, 17 of 24 eyes (70.8%) and 44 of 80 (55.0%) eyes. These results are also statistically significant, with entoptic perimetry being more sensitive and less specific than both subjective impression (P = 0.007 and P = 0.011, respectively) and Amsler grid (P = 0.008 and P < 0.001, respectively) in this subset of patients. CONCLUSIONS Entoptic perimetry is 87% more sensitive than the subjective impression of visual decline (P < 0.001) and 100% more sensitive than Amsler grid (P < 0.001) for the detection of central scotomas in diabetic patients. For the detection of CSME, entoptic perimetry is 183% more sensitive than subjective impression (P = 0.007) and 89% more sensitive than Amsler grid (P = 0.008). Hence, entoptic perimetry, performed using conventional television, has the potential to be an effective, inexpensive, and widespread adjunct to surveillance examinations for the early detection of diabetic maculopathy.