IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0177059.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

OCT-angiography: A qualitative and quantitative comparison of 4 OCT-A devices

Author

Listed:
  • Marion R Munk
  • Helena Giannakaki-Zimmermann
  • Lieselotte Berger
  • Wolfgang Huf
  • Andreas Ebneter
  • Sebastian Wolf
  • Martin S Zinkernagel

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the quality of four OCT-angiography(OCT-A) modules. Method: The retina of nineteen healthy volunteers were scanned with four OCT-devices (Topcon DRI-OCT Triton Swept-source OCT, Optovue RTVue-XR, a prototype Spectralis OCT2, Heidelberg-Engineering and Zeiss Cirrus 5000-HD-OCT). The device-software generated en-face OCT-A images of the superficial (SCP) and deep capillary plexuses (DCP) were evaluated and scored by 3 independent retinal imaging experts. The SCP vessel density was assessed using Angiotool-software. After the inter-grader reliability assessment, a consensus grading was performed and the modules were ranked based on their scoring. Results: There was no significant difference in the vessel density among the modules (Zeiss 48.7±4%, Optovue 47.9±3%, Topcon 48.3±2%, Heidelberg 46.5±4%, p = 0.2). The numbers of discernible vessel-bifurcations differed significantly on each module (Zeiss 2±0.9 bifurcations, Optovue 2.5±1.2, Topcon 1.3±0.7 and Heidelberg 0.5±0.6, p≤0.001). The ranking of each module differed depending on the evaluated parameter. In the overall ranking, the Zeiss module was superior and in 90% better than the median (Bonferroni corrected p-value = 0.04). Optovue was better than the median in 60%, Topcon in 40% and Heidelberg module in 10%, however these differences were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Each of the four evaluated OCT-A modules had particular strengths, which differentiated it from their competitors.

Suggested Citation

  • Marion R Munk & Helena Giannakaki-Zimmermann & Lieselotte Berger & Wolfgang Huf & Andreas Ebneter & Sebastian Wolf & Martin S Zinkernagel, 2017. "OCT-angiography: A qualitative and quantitative comparison of 4 OCT-A devices," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-14, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0177059
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177059
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177059
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177059&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0177059?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:pone00:0177059. 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.