Performance evaluation of two fundus oculi angiographic imaging system: Optos 200Tx and Heidelberg Spectralis

Li,Shuang; Wang,Jing-Jing; Li,Hong-Yang; Wang,Wei; Tian,Meng; Lang,Xu-Qiang; Wang,Kang

doi:10.3892/etm.2020.9451

Performance evaluation of two fundus oculi angiographic imaging system: Optos 200Tx and Heidelberg Spectralis

Authors:
- Shuang Li
- Jing-Jing Wang
- Hong-Yang Li
- Wei Wang
- Meng Tian
- Xu-Qiang Lang
- Kang Wang
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Ophthalmology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, P.R. China
Published online on: November 5, 2020 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2020.9451
Article Number: 19
Copyright: © Li et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

The present study aimed to compare the imaging performance of two ultra‑wide‑field ﬂuorescein angiography imaging systems, namely the OptosOptomap 200Tx (Optos 200Tx) and the Heidelberg Spectralis (Spectralis). A total of 18 patients (36 eyes) underwent angiography using the two systems at the Department of Ophthalmology, Beijing Friendship Hospital (Beijing, China) between January and June 2017. The images were obtained as a single shot centered on the macula. The total area and area within each of four visualized quadrants were calculated and compared. The averages of the total and individual quadrant area captured by the Optos 200Tx were all larger than those obtained with the Spectralis (P<0.05). For pair‑wise comparison, the circular area centered on the macula (radius of 10 and 15 mm) was displayed: Optos 200Tx 10 mm (295.57 mm2) < Spectralis (520.11 mm2) < Optos 200Tx 15 mm (596.45 mm2) < Optos 200Tx (804.36 mm2) (P<0.01). The differences of each of the four quadrant areas were statistically significant between the two systems (P<0.05). The mean size of the areas was in the following order: Inferior < temporal < superior < nasal for the Optos 200Tx, and inferior < temporal < nasal < superior for the Spectralis. Further comparison of the four‑quadrant area indicated that the inferior quadrant of the Optos 200Tx was smaller than the other three quadrants (P<0.01) and the inferior quadrant of the Spectralis was smaller than the superior quadrant (P<0.01). The total retinal area and the retinal area of each quadrant captured by the Optos 200Tx were larger than those captured with the Spectralis. The total retinal area captured with the Optos 200Tx was able to cover the mid‑peripheral area and part of the far‑peripheral area of the retina, whereas the Spectralis only covered the mid‑peripheral area.

View Figures

View References

1	Shoughy SS, Arevalo JF and Kozak I: Update on wide- and ultra-widefield retinal imaging. Indian J Ophthalmol. 63:575–581. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
2	Calvo CM and Hartnett ME: The utility of ultra-widefield fluorescein angiography in pediatric retinal diseases. Int J Retina Vitreous. 4(21)2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
3	Lim LS, Mitchell P, Seddon JM, Holz FG and Wong TY: Age-related macular degeneration. Lancet. 379:1728–1738. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
4	Chen JJ and Kardon RH: Avoiding clinical misinterpretation and artifacts of optical coherence tomography analysis of the optic nerve, retinal nerve fiber layer, and ganglion cell layer. J Neuroophthalmol. 36:417–438. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
5	Polans J, Keller B, Carrasco-Zevallos OM, LaRocca F, Cole E, Whitson HE, Lad EM, Farsiu S and Izatt JA: Wide-field retinal optical coherence tomography with wavefront sensorless adaptive optics for enhanced imaging of targeted regions. Biomed Opt Express. 8:16–37. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
6	Rasmussen ML, Broe R, Frydkjaer-Olsen U, Olsen BS, Mortensen HB, Peto T and Grauslund J: Comparison between early treatment diabetic retinopathy study 7-field retinal photos and non-mydriatic, mydriatic and mydriatic steered widefield scanning laser ophthalmoscopy for assessment of diabetic retinopathy. J Diabetes Complications. 29:99–104. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
7	Gardner TW, Sander B, Larsen ML, Kunselman A, Tenhave T, Lund-Andersen H, Reimers J, Hubbard L, Blankenship GW, Quillen DA, et al: An extension of the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) system for grading of diabetic macular edema in the Astemizole Retinopathy Trial. Curr Eye Res. 31:535–547. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
8	Witmer MT and Kiss S: Wide-field imaging of the retina. Surv Ophthalmol. 58:143–154. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
9	Shifera AS, Pennesi ME, Yang P and Lin P: Ultra-wide-field fundus autofluorescence findings in patients with acute zonal occult outer retinopathy. Retina. 37:1104–1119. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
10	Ghasemi Falavarjani K, Wang K, Khadamy J and Sadda SR: Ultra-wide-field imaging in diabetic retinopathy; an overview. J Curr Ophthalmol. 28:57–60. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
11	Bernardes R, Serranho P and Lobo C: Digital ocular fundus imaging: A review. Ophthalmologica. 226:161–181. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
12	Bae K, Cho K, Kang SW, Kim SJ and Kim JM: Peripheral reticular pigmentary degeneration and choroidal vascular insufficiency, studied by ultra wide-field fluorescein angiography. PLoS One. 12(e0170526)2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
13	Zhou J and Wei W: Optos 200Tx scanning laser ophthalmoscope for wide-field fluorescein angiography and its clinical application. Int Rev Ophthalmol. 2:103–106. 2015.
14	Witmer MT, Parlitsis G, Patel S and Kiss S: Comparison of ultra-widefield fluorescein angiography with the Heidelberg Spectralis(®) noncontact ultra-widefield module versus the Optos(®) Optomap(®). Clin Ophthalmol. 7:389–394. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
15	Kernt M and Kampik A: Imaging of the peripheral retina. Oman J Ophthalmol. 6 (Suppl 1):S32–S35. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
16	Wang K, Ghasemi Falavarjani K, Nittala MG, Sagong M, Wykoff CC, van Hemert J, Ip M and Sadda SR: Ultra-wide-field fluorescein angiography-guided normalization of ischemic index calculation in eyes with retinal vein occlusion. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 59:3278–3285. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
17	Chhablani J and Jayadev C: Future in retinal imaging for clinicians. Indian J Ophthalmol. 63:370–372. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
18	Widmer LK, Biland L, Delley A and da Silva A: The importance of peripheral-arterial occlusive diseases in medical practice. Conclusions from the Basel study. Schweiz Med Wochenschr. 113:1824–1827. 1983.(In German). PubMed/NCBI
19	Tan CS, Chew MC, Lim LW and Sadda SR: Advances in retinal imaging for diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema. Indian J Ophthalmol. 64:76–83. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
20	Gelfand JM, Nolan R, Schwartz DM, Graves J and Green AJ: Microcystic macular oedema in multiple sclerosis is associated with disease severity. Brain. 135:1786–1793. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
21	Espina MP, Arcinue CA, Ma F, Camacho N, Bartsch DU and Freeman WR: Analysis of a confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope noncontact ultra-wide field lens system in retinal and choroidal disease. Retina. 35:2664–2668. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
22	Kida T: Mystery of retinal vein occlusion: Vasoactivity of the vein and possible involvement of endothelin-1. BioMed Res Int. 2017(4816527)2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar