Color fundus photography versus fluorescein angiography in identification of the macular center and zone in retinopathy of prematurity

Samir N. Patel, Michael A. Klufas, Michael C. Ryan, Karyn E. Jonas, Susan Ostmo, Maria Ana Martinez-Castellanos, Audina Berrocal, Michael F. Chiang, R. V Paul Chan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose To examine the usefulness of fluorescein angiography (FA) in identifying the macular center and diagnosis of zone in patients with retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). Design Validity and reliability analysis of diagnostic tools. Methods Thirty-two sets (16 color fundus photographs and 16 color fundus photographs paired with the corresponding FA images) of wide-angle retinal images obtained from 16 eyes of 8 infants with ROP were compiled on a secure web site. Nine ROP experts (3 pediatric ophthalmologists and 6 vitreoretinal surgeons) participated in the study. For each image set, experts identified the macular center and provided a diagnosis of zone. main outcome measures: (1) Sensitivity and specificity of zone diagnosis and (2) computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone, based on precise measurement of the macular center, optic disc center, and peripheral ROP. Results Computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone agreed with the expert's diagnosis of zone in 28 (62%) of 45 cases using color fundus photographs and in 31 (69%) of 45 cases using FA images. Mean (95% confidence interval) sensitivity for detection of zone I by experts compared with a consensus reference standard diagnosis when interpreting the color fundus images alone versus interpreting the color fundus photographs and FA images was 47% (range, 35.3% to 59.3%) and 61.1% (range, 48.9% to 72.4%), respectively (t(9) ≥ (2.063); P =.073). Conclusions There is a marginally significant difference in zone diagnosis when using color fundus photographs compared with using color fundus photographs and the corresponding FA images. There is inconsistency between traditional zone diagnosis (based on ophthalmoscopic examination and image review) compared with a computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number9223
Pages (from-to)950-957
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican Journal of Ophthalmology
Volume159
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2015

Fingerprint

Retinopathy of Prematurity
Fluorescein Angiography
Photography
Color
Optic Disk
Reproducibility of Results
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Confidence Intervals
Pediatrics
Sensitivity and Specificity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

Patel, S. N., Klufas, M. A., Ryan, M. C., Jonas, K. E., Ostmo, S., Martinez-Castellanos, M. A., ... Chan, R. V. P. (2015). Color fundus photography versus fluorescein angiography in identification of the macular center and zone in retinopathy of prematurity. American Journal of Ophthalmology, 159(5), 950-957. [9223]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2015.01.027

Color fundus photography versus fluorescein angiography in identification of the macular center and zone in retinopathy of prematurity. / Patel, Samir N.; Klufas, Michael A.; Ryan, Michael C.; Jonas, Karyn E.; Ostmo, Susan; Martinez-Castellanos, Maria Ana; Berrocal, Audina; Chiang, Michael F.; Chan, R. V Paul.

In: American Journal of Ophthalmology, Vol. 159, No. 5, 9223, 01.05.2015, p. 950-957.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Patel, SN, Klufas, MA, Ryan, MC, Jonas, KE, Ostmo, S, Martinez-Castellanos, MA, Berrocal, A, Chiang, MF & Chan, RVP 2015, 'Color fundus photography versus fluorescein angiography in identification of the macular center and zone in retinopathy of prematurity', American Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 159, no. 5, 9223, pp. 950-957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2015.01.027
Patel, Samir N. ; Klufas, Michael A. ; Ryan, Michael C. ; Jonas, Karyn E. ; Ostmo, Susan ; Martinez-Castellanos, Maria Ana ; Berrocal, Audina ; Chiang, Michael F. ; Chan, R. V Paul. / Color fundus photography versus fluorescein angiography in identification of the macular center and zone in retinopathy of prematurity. In: American Journal of Ophthalmology. 2015 ; Vol. 159, No. 5. pp. 950-957.
@article{3f933a5ead174f6591ea8fa2de6a1f31,
title = "Color fundus photography versus fluorescein angiography in identification of the macular center and zone in retinopathy of prematurity",
abstract = "Purpose To examine the usefulness of fluorescein angiography (FA) in identifying the macular center and diagnosis of zone in patients with retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). Design Validity and reliability analysis of diagnostic tools. Methods Thirty-two sets (16 color fundus photographs and 16 color fundus photographs paired with the corresponding FA images) of wide-angle retinal images obtained from 16 eyes of 8 infants with ROP were compiled on a secure web site. Nine ROP experts (3 pediatric ophthalmologists and 6 vitreoretinal surgeons) participated in the study. For each image set, experts identified the macular center and provided a diagnosis of zone. main outcome measures: (1) Sensitivity and specificity of zone diagnosis and (2) computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone, based on precise measurement of the macular center, optic disc center, and peripheral ROP. Results Computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone agreed with the expert's diagnosis of zone in 28 (62{\%}) of 45 cases using color fundus photographs and in 31 (69{\%}) of 45 cases using FA images. Mean (95{\%} confidence interval) sensitivity for detection of zone I by experts compared with a consensus reference standard diagnosis when interpreting the color fundus images alone versus interpreting the color fundus photographs and FA images was 47{\%} (range, 35.3{\%} to 59.3{\%}) and 61.1{\%} (range, 48.9{\%} to 72.4{\%}), respectively (t(9) ≥ (2.063); P =.073). Conclusions There is a marginally significant difference in zone diagnosis when using color fundus photographs compared with using color fundus photographs and the corresponding FA images. There is inconsistency between traditional zone diagnosis (based on ophthalmoscopic examination and image review) compared with a computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone.",
author = "Patel, {Samir N.} and Klufas, {Michael A.} and Ryan, {Michael C.} and Jonas, {Karyn E.} and Susan Ostmo and Martinez-Castellanos, {Maria Ana} and Audina Berrocal and Chiang, {Michael F.} and Chan, {R. V Paul}",
year = "2015",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ajo.2015.01.027",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "159",
pages = "950--957",
journal = "American Journal of Ophthalmology",
issn = "0002-9394",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Color fundus photography versus fluorescein angiography in identification of the macular center and zone in retinopathy of prematurity

AU - Patel, Samir N.

AU - Klufas, Michael A.

AU - Ryan, Michael C.

AU - Jonas, Karyn E.

AU - Ostmo, Susan

AU - Martinez-Castellanos, Maria Ana

AU - Berrocal, Audina

AU - Chiang, Michael F.

AU - Chan, R. V Paul

PY - 2015/5/1

Y1 - 2015/5/1

N2 - Purpose To examine the usefulness of fluorescein angiography (FA) in identifying the macular center and diagnosis of zone in patients with retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). Design Validity and reliability analysis of diagnostic tools. Methods Thirty-two sets (16 color fundus photographs and 16 color fundus photographs paired with the corresponding FA images) of wide-angle retinal images obtained from 16 eyes of 8 infants with ROP were compiled on a secure web site. Nine ROP experts (3 pediatric ophthalmologists and 6 vitreoretinal surgeons) participated in the study. For each image set, experts identified the macular center and provided a diagnosis of zone. main outcome measures: (1) Sensitivity and specificity of zone diagnosis and (2) computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone, based on precise measurement of the macular center, optic disc center, and peripheral ROP. Results Computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone agreed with the expert's diagnosis of zone in 28 (62%) of 45 cases using color fundus photographs and in 31 (69%) of 45 cases using FA images. Mean (95% confidence interval) sensitivity for detection of zone I by experts compared with a consensus reference standard diagnosis when interpreting the color fundus images alone versus interpreting the color fundus photographs and FA images was 47% (range, 35.3% to 59.3%) and 61.1% (range, 48.9% to 72.4%), respectively (t(9) ≥ (2.063); P =.073). Conclusions There is a marginally significant difference in zone diagnosis when using color fundus photographs compared with using color fundus photographs and the corresponding FA images. There is inconsistency between traditional zone diagnosis (based on ophthalmoscopic examination and image review) compared with a computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone.

AB - Purpose To examine the usefulness of fluorescein angiography (FA) in identifying the macular center and diagnosis of zone in patients with retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). Design Validity and reliability analysis of diagnostic tools. Methods Thirty-two sets (16 color fundus photographs and 16 color fundus photographs paired with the corresponding FA images) of wide-angle retinal images obtained from 16 eyes of 8 infants with ROP were compiled on a secure web site. Nine ROP experts (3 pediatric ophthalmologists and 6 vitreoretinal surgeons) participated in the study. For each image set, experts identified the macular center and provided a diagnosis of zone. main outcome measures: (1) Sensitivity and specificity of zone diagnosis and (2) computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone, based on precise measurement of the macular center, optic disc center, and peripheral ROP. Results Computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone agreed with the expert's diagnosis of zone in 28 (62%) of 45 cases using color fundus photographs and in 31 (69%) of 45 cases using FA images. Mean (95% confidence interval) sensitivity for detection of zone I by experts compared with a consensus reference standard diagnosis when interpreting the color fundus images alone versus interpreting the color fundus photographs and FA images was 47% (range, 35.3% to 59.3%) and 61.1% (range, 48.9% to 72.4%), respectively (t(9) ≥ (2.063); P =.073). Conclusions There is a marginally significant difference in zone diagnosis when using color fundus photographs compared with using color fundus photographs and the corresponding FA images. There is inconsistency between traditional zone diagnosis (based on ophthalmoscopic examination and image review) compared with a computer-facilitated diagnosis of zone.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84927567631&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84927567631&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ajo.2015.01.027

DO - 10.1016/j.ajo.2015.01.027

M3 - Article

C2 - 25637180

AN - SCOPUS:84927567631

VL - 159

SP - 950

EP - 957

JO - American Journal of Ophthalmology

JF - American Journal of Ophthalmology

SN - 0002-9394

IS - 5

M1 - 9223

ER -