IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0137316.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reliability of Intra-Retinal Layer Thickness Estimates

Author

Listed:
  • Timm Oberwahrenbrock
  • Maria Weinhold
  • Janine Mikolajczak
  • Hanna Zimmermann
  • Friedemann Paul
  • Ingeborg Beckers
  • Alexander U Brandt

Abstract

Purpose: Measurement of intra-retinal layer thickness using optical coherence tomography (OCT) has become increasingly prominent in multiple sclerosis (MS) research. Nevertheless, the approaches used for determining the mean layer thicknesses vary greatly. Insufficient data exist on the reliability of different thickness estimates, which is crucial for their application in clinical studies. This study addresses this lack by evaluating the repeatability of different thickness estimates. Methods: Studies that used intra-retinal layer segmentation of macular OCT scans in patients with MS were retrieved from PubMed. To investigate the repeatability of previously applied layer estimation approaches, we generated datasets of repeating measurements of 15 healthy subjects and 13 multiple sclerosis patients using two OCT devices (Cirrus HD-OCT and Spectralis SD-OCT). We calculated each thickness estimate in each repeated session and analyzed repeatability using intra-class correlation coefficients and coefficients of repeatability. Results: We identified 27 articles, eleven of them used the Spectralis SD-OCT, nine Cirrus HD-OCT, two studies used both devices and two studies applied RTVue-100. Topcon OCT-1000, Stratus OCT and a research device were used in one study each. In the studies that used the Spectralis, ten different thickness estimates were identified, while thickness estimates of the Cirrus OCT were based on two different scan settings. In the simulation dataset, thickness estimates averaging larger areas showed an excellent repeatability for all retinal layers except the outer plexiform layer (OPL). Conclusions: Given the good reliability, the thickness estimate of the 6mm-diameter area around the fovea should be favored when OCT is used in clinical research. Assessment of the OPL was weak in general and needs further investigation before OPL thickness can be used as a reliable parameter.

Suggested Citation

  • Timm Oberwahrenbrock & Maria Weinhold & Janine Mikolajczak & Hanna Zimmermann & Friedemann Paul & Ingeborg Beckers & Alexander U Brandt, 2015. "Reliability of Intra-Retinal Layer Thickness Estimates," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-16, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0137316
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0137316
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0137316
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0137316&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0137316?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0137316. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.