Comparison of manually corrected retinal thickness measurements from multiple spectral-domain optical coherence tomography instruments

Abstract

When a uniform position is used to locate the outer retinal boundary, the retinal thickness measurements derived from three different spectral domain optical coherence instruments devices are virtually identical. Manual correction may allow OCT-derived thickness measurements to be compared between devices in clinical trials and clinical research.

Correlation Between Foveal Interdigitation Zone Band Defect and Visual Acuity After Surgery for Macular Pseudohole

“…The correlations and interchangeability between these two instruments in measuring retinal thickness, choroidal thickness, and investigating the foveal microstructure, have been reported to be high. [36][37][38] Therefore, further studies with a larger sample size and higher-resolution OCT are needed to confirm the results of this study.…”

Resolution of subretinal fluid with systemic corticosteroid treatment in acute Vogt–Koyanagi–Harada disease

“…Although patients were examined with either Spectralis HRA+OCT or 3D OCT-1000 machines, each patient was scanned with the same instrument during all follow-up visits. Despite differences in automated retinal thickness map calculation between different SD-OCT machines, manual correction of retinal segmentation improves reproducibility and eliminates the differences in retinal thickness measurement 17. In the current study, foveal thickness and SRF height were measured manually with the machines’ internal caliper; thus, we do not think using two different SD-OCT machines limits interpretation of the results.…”

Predicting macular hole closure with ocriplasmin based on spectral domain optical coherence tomography

“…Two different OCT machines were used but both were SD and measurements were made manually by one observer avoiding segmentation differences. 24 Measurement variability is a known issue however when assessing macular holes and it is possible that the results would not be the same using different machines and observers. 25 All patients were white Caucasian and the results may not be applicable to other populations.…”