Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is a retinal vasoproliferative disease that affects premature infants. Despite improvements in neonatal care and management guidelines, ROP remains a leading cause of childhood blindness worldwide. Current screening guidelines are primarily based on two risk factors: birth weight and gestational age; however, many investigators have suggested other risk factors, including maternal factors, prenatal and perinatal factors, demographics, medical interventions, comorbidities of prematurity, nutrition, and genetic factors. We review the existing literature addressing various possible ROP risk factors. Although there have been contradictory reports, and the risk may vary between different populations, understanding ROP risk factors is essential to develop predictive models, to gain insights into pathophysiology of retinal vascular diseases and diseases of prematurity, and to determine future directions in management of and research in ROP.

Objective To identify patterns of inter-expert discrepancy in plus disease diagnosis in retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). Design We developed two datasets of clinical images of varying disease severity (100 images and 34 images) as part of the Imaging and Informatics in ROP study, and determined a consensus reference standard diagnosis (RSD) for each image, based on 3 independent image graders and the clinical exam. We recruited 8 expert ROP clinicians to classify these images and compared the distribution of classifications between experts and the RSD. Subjects, Participants, and/or Controls Images obtained during routine ROP screening in neonatal intensive care units. 8 participating experts with >10 years of clinical ROP experience and >5 peer-reviewed ROP publications. Methods, Intervention, or Testing Expert classification of images of plus disease in ROP. Main Outcome Measures Inter-expert agreement (weighted kappa statistic), and agreement and bias on ordinal classification between experts (ANOVA) and the RSD (percent agreement). Results There was variable inter-expert agreement on diagnostic classifications between the 8 experts and the RSD (weighted kappa 0 – 0.75, mean 0.30). RSD agreement ranged from 80 – 94% agreement for the dataset of 100 images, and 29 – 79% for the dataset of 34 images. However, when images were ranked in order of disease severity (by average expert classification), the pattern of expert classification revealed a consistent systematic bias for each expert consistent with unique cut points for the diagnosis of plus disease and pre-plus disease. The two-way ANOVA model suggested a highly significant effect of both image and user on the average score (P<0.05, adjusted R2=0.82 for dataset A, and P< 0.05 and adjusted R2 =0.6615 for dataset B). Conclusions and Relevance There is wide variability in the classification of plus disease by ROP experts, which occurs because experts have different “cut-points” for the amounts of vascular abnormality required for presence of plus and pre-plus disease. This has important implications for research, teaching and patient care for ROP, and suggests that a continuous ROP plus disease severity score may more accurately reflect the behavior of expert ROP clinicians, and may better standardize classification in the future.

No abstract

A tele-education system for ROP education was effective in improving the diagnostic accuracy of ROP by ophthalmologists-in-training in Mexico. This system has the potential to increase competency in ROP diagnosis and management for ophthalmologists-in-training from middle-income nations.

Most candidate gene studies of ROP have limitations such as inability to replicate results, conflicting results from various studies, small sample size, and differences in clinical characterization. Additional difficulty arises in separating the contribution of genetic factors like Wnt signaling to ROP and prematurity. Although studies have implicated involvement of multiple signaling pathways in ROP, the genetics of ROP have not been clearly elucidated. Next-generation sequencing and genome-wide association studies have potential to expand future understanding of underlying genetic risk factors and pathophysiology of ROP.