Direct comparison of spectral-domain and swept-source OCT in the measurement of choroidal thickness in normal eyes

Copete, Sergio; Flores‐Moreno, Ignacio; Montero, Javier A.; Duker, Jay S.; Ruiz-Moreno, José M.

doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2013-303904

Cited by 180 publications

(115 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

101

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This study results regarding the subfoveal CCT in healthy controls were similar to Margolis and Spaide [12] (who used the same EDI-OCT technique) who reported a subfoveal CCT of 287 ± 76 μm in healthy subjects and Copete et al [13] who reported a subfoveal CCT of 286 ± 88μm healthy subjects using Swept Source OCT. In this study, the CCT was noted to be thinnest nasally, then increase in thickness in ascending order from the nasal to the inferior to the temporal to the superior quadrants in a circular manner also it was found to be thickest subfoveally in both groups.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Macular Choroidal Thickness Measurement by Enhanced Depth Imaging Optical Coherence Tomography in Type (II) Diabetes Mellitus Patients

Marey

Elgouhary

Gad³

2016

International Journal of Ophthalmic Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AIM:To evaluate the central (macular) choroidal thickness in diabetic patients with type (II) diabetes mellitus (DM) using enhanced depth imaging optical coherence tomography (EDI-OCT). METHODS: A prospective clinical interventional study included 100 eyes of 100 subjects divided into two groups: Group (A) included 50 eyes of 50 diabetic patients with type (II) DM and Group (B) included 50 eyes of 50 age-matched normal healthy controls with no gender or laterality specification. The central choroidal thickness (CCT) was measured from the posterior edge of RPE to the choroidscleral junction at 1500 µm intervals up to 3000 µm from the fovea using EDI-OCT in 11 quadrants and regions. RESULTS: Mean age in group (A) was 42 ± 7 years (range, 26-50 years), and 39 ± 9 years (range, 25-50 years) in group (B). Mean duration of DM was 7.96 ± 3.9 years in group (A). Subfoveal CCT was 291 ± 42 µm in group (A), (275.31 ± 31 µm for no apparent retinopathy (No DR), 298 ± 42 µm for non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR), 309 ± 58 µm for proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR), 277 ± 29 µm for diabetic macular edema (DME) absent and 306 ± 47 µm for DME present) while it was 284 ± 54 µm in group (B). There was a statistically significant positive correlation

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Macular Choroidal Thickness Measurement by Enhanced Depth Imaging Optical Coherence Tomography in Type (II) Diabetes Mellitus Patients

Marey

Elgouhary

Gad³

2016

International Journal of Ophthalmic Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Copete et al 17 found similar SFCT measurements with SD-OCT with EDI compared with faster ss-OCT at 1050 nm as did Ikuno et al 18 Differences in image quality of the vitreoretinal interface between the two systems was not evaluated. Despite the perceived superior quality of choroidal imaging with 1050-nm OCT in our study, it did not seem to improve the ability to measure SFCT compared with 870 nm with EDI.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Retinal and Choroidal Imaging With 870-nm Spectral-Domain OCT Compared With 1050-nm Spectral-Domain OCT, With and Without Enhanced Depth Imaging

Verner-Cole

Campbell

Hwang

et al. 2014

Trans. Vis. Sci. Tech.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare images of the retina and choroid obtained with Spectralis 1050-nm spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) with and without enhanced depth imaging (EDI) to the commercially available 870-nm SD-OCT with and without EDI.Methods: Full-length 308 line scans were obtained with both 870-and 1050-nm Spectralis OCT instruments, with and without EDI. Two trained retina physicians masked to wavelength and EDI status assessed the ability to visualize the vitreoretinal interface and full-thickness choroid, and subfoveal choroidal thickness (SFCT) was measured.Results: Included in the study were 21 eyes. The vitreoretinal interface was visualized best with 870-nm OCT without EDI and was diminished with 1050-nm OCT. Graders preferred 1050 nm with EDI over 870 nm with EDI in qualitative comparisons of the choroid; 1050 nm without EDI was slightly preferred over 870 nm with EDI but was not statistically significant. SFCT measurements correlated well among the imaging modalities except for 870 nm without EDI.Conclusions: SD-OCT with EDI at 870 nm provides good visualization of both the vitreoretinal interface and choroid, whereas 1050-nm SD-OCT with or without EDI provides more choroidal detail at the expense of visualization of the vitreoretinal interface.

show abstract

“…Previous reports, however, only compared the choroidal thickness measurements and did not consider the penetration of the OCT signal beyond the choroidoscleral junction, which cannot be inferred from thickness comparisons alone. 8,11,12 Choroidal thickness is an important factor in determining if the choroidoscleral junction can be identified by OCT, owing to the increasing distance from the external limit of the choroid to the zero-delay line of the OCT instrument in a relatively thicker choroid, or the increased light scattering induced by a thicker choroid. 11 Our study counteracts this limitation by introducing signal penetration depth as a new measure that has not been evaluated previously.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…8,11,12 Choroidal thickness is an important factor in determining if the choroidoscleral junction can be identified by OCT, owing to the increasing distance from the external limit of the choroid to the zero-delay line of the OCT instrument in a relatively thicker choroid, or the increased light scattering induced by a thicker choroid. 11 Our study counteracts this limitation by introducing signal penetration depth as a new measure that has not been evaluated previously. We believe that the penetration depth of an OCT system is of higher clinical relevance because it allows conclusions to be drawn about situations of, for example, choroidal thickening beyond the normal range.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of penetration depth in choroidal imaging using swept source vs spectral domain optical coherence tomography

Faatz

Szimacsek

et al. 2015

Eye

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To compare signal penetration depth and deep structure-visualization of swept source (SS) and spectral domain (SD)-optical coherence tomography (OCT) with and without enhanced depth imaging (EDI) and B-scan averaging modes. Methods Volume scans were obtained from 20 eyes of healthy volunteers by DRI OCT-1, Spectralis using EDI and B-scan averaging, and Cirrus HD-OCT. The signal penetration depth was measured as the distance between the retinal pigment epithelium and the deepest visible anatomical structure at the foveal center. Visibility and contrast of the choroidoscleral junction and of vascular details within the choroid were assessed across the entire volume using an ordinal scoring scale. Outcome measures were compared using paired t-test and rank-sum test.

show abstract

Direct comparison of spectral-domain and swept-source OCT in the measurement of choroidal thickness in normal eyes

Abstract: SS-OCT permitted accurate identification of the choroido-scleral border in 100% of normal eyes, suggesting that SS-OCT was the superior modality for the measurement of CT.

Cited by 180 publications

References 25 publications

Macular Choroidal Thickness Measurement by Enhanced Depth Imaging Optical Coherence Tomography in Type (II) Diabetes Mellitus Patients

Macular Choroidal Thickness Measurement by Enhanced Depth Imaging Optical Coherence Tomography in Type (II) Diabetes Mellitus Patients

Retinal and Choroidal Imaging With 870-nm Spectral-Domain OCT Compared With 1050-nm Spectral-Domain OCT, With and Without Enhanced Depth Imaging

Comparison of penetration depth in choroidal imaging using swept source vs spectral domain optical coherence tomography

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About