Sensitivity and specificity of pseudocolor ultrawide field imaging in comparison to wide field fundus fluorescein angiography in detecting retinal neovascularization in diabetic retinopathy.
Journal
Eye (London, England)
ISSN: 1476-5454
Titre abrégé: Eye (Lond)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8703986
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2022
10 2022
Historique:
received:
23
03
2021
accepted:
10
09
2021
revised:
03
08
2021
pubmed:
30
9
2021
medline:
28
9
2022
entrez:
29
9
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ultrawide pseudocolor retinal photography (pseudocolor UWF) compared to wide field fundus fluorescein angiography (WFFFA) in the detection of retinal neovascularization (NV) and NV of the disc (NVD) in patients with diabetic retinopathy (DR). Diagnostic accuracy observational study evaluating pseudocolor UWF as the index test. The reference standard was WFFFA. Single retinal centre in India. People with severe non-proliferative DR (sNPDR), early proliferative DR (ePDR) or high-risk proliferative DR (HR PDR). Sensitivity and specificity of pseudocolor UWF in the detection of NV. A total of 176 eyes of 94 subjects with sNPDR, ePDR or HR PDR underwent pseudocolor UWF and WFFFA. The sensitivity and specificity of pseudocolor UWF in detecting NVE were 92.5% (95% CI 86.2-96.5) and 81% (95% CI 64.8-92.0), respectively, with moderate interobserver agreement of 0.722 (p value 0.001). The positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 83.0 (71.4-90.5) and 91.5 (84.9-95.3), respectively. Compared to WFFFA as the gold standard, pseudocolor UWF has high sensitivity and specificity in detection of NV in all retinal quadrants and NVD. Therefore, pseudocolor UWF may be used as a non-invasive tool for screening and managing DR.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34584231
doi: 10.1038/s41433-021-01772-y
pii: 10.1038/s41433-021-01772-y
pmc: PMC9499994
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1940-1944Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Royal College of Ophthalmologists.
Références
JAMA. 2016 Dec 13;316(22):2402-2410
pubmed: 27898976
Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2008 Feb;246(2):229-35
pubmed: 17622548
Clin Exp Optom. 2017 Jan;100(1):79-82
pubmed: 27476647
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2016 Jan;134(1):13-4
pubmed: 26583372
Ophthalmol Retina. 2019 Oct;3(10):843-849
pubmed: 31302104
Retina. 2007 Oct;27(8):1119-24
pubmed: 18040256
Ophthalmology. 2018 Sep;125(9):1386-1392
pubmed: 29606377
Ophthalmology. 2015 May;122(5):949-56
pubmed: 25704318
Clin Ophthalmol. 2013;7:389-94
pubmed: 23458976
Lancet. 2017 Jun 3;389(10085):2193-2203
pubmed: 28494920
Am J Ophthalmol. 2009 Jul;148(1):111-8
pubmed: 19406376
Ophthalmology. 2020 Apr;127(4S):S99-S119
pubmed: 32200833
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2021 Feb 1;139(2):206-213
pubmed: 33377944
Int J Retina Vitreous. 2019 Dec 12;5(Suppl 1):27
pubmed: 31890287
Arch Ophthalmol. 1979 Apr;97(4):654-5
pubmed: 426679
Diabetes Care. 2012 Dec;35(12):2459-63
pubmed: 22912430
PLoS One. 2020 Aug 21;15(8):e0238072
pubmed: 32822418