Reproducibility of Disc and Macula Optical Coherence Tomography using the Canon OCT-HS100 as Compared with the Zeiss Cirrus HD-OCT

Brautaset, Rune; Birkeldh, Ulrika; Rosén, Rebecka; Ramsay, Marika Wahlberg; Nilsson, Maria

doi:10.5301/ejo.5000437

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Measuring the cup volume and C/D-ratio has shown to be difficult. This is in agreement with other studies [ 19 , 22 , 26 ]. In comparison to the study of Brautaset et al [ 19 ] the CR% in macula has increased with the automatic tracking.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

“…However, differences between instruments can also be caused by differences in the algorithms used to define retinal structural layers independent of resolution [ 15 , 16 ]. When excluding cup volume from the analysis, CR% values of the optic disc, range from 0.90 to 12.66% and 0.00–8.51% with the Canon and Zeiss respectively, which is in line with prior studies [ 19 , 23 – 27 ]. Measurements in the macular region provided good repeatability, better than in the optic disc.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…In general, all measurements obtained with the Canon OCT are greater/thicker in both the optic disc and macular region with exception of C/D-vertical ratio and cup-volume ( Table 3 ). This can most likely be explained by different scanning circle diameter, where the Canon device uses a slightly smaller scanning circle [ 19 ]. In spite of this, the correlation between the two devices is good, but because of the difference in thickness estimation, they are not interchangeable.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The main objective was to evaluate macula and optic disc measurement repeatability using the automatic tracing function in the Canon OCT-HS100 and the Zeiss Cirrus HD-OCT 5000 and to evaluate whether the function improved the repeatability in comparison to the study of Brautaset et al [ 19 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a previously published paper we [ 19 ] evaluated and compared the repeatability of disc and macula OCT measurements without the use of automatic eye tracking with the Canon OCT-HS100 and Zeiss Cirrus-OCT 4000. In newer models of both instruments (software upgrade in the Canon and version 5000 of the Zeiss OCT) automatic tracing systems are available.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Repeatability Using Automatic Tracing with Canon OCT- HS100 and Zeiss Cirrus HD-OCT 5000

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundOptical coherence tomography (OCT), can be used in clinical practice to provide high resolution cross-sectional images of the retina, optic disc and macula structure. These measurements can be useful for early detection, diagnosis, monitoring and treatment guidance for retinal diseases. Therefore, repeatability of measurements in OCT is of great importance.MethodsMacula and optic disc parameters from the right eye of 30 healthy subjects were obtained twice with the Canon OCT-HS100 and Zeiss Cirrus HD-OCT 5000. Repeatability was evaluated by use of the coefficient of repeatability (CR) and the coefficient of repeatability as a percentage of the mean (CR%), and the obtained measurements were compared between the instruments.ResultsCR% of optic disc parameters ranged between 0.90 and 22.22% and 0.00 and 16.00% with the Canon and Zeiss OCT respectively. For macular parameters CR% ranged between 0.62 and 2.81% and 0.99 and 1.81% with the Canon and Zeiss OCT respectively. No statistical difference could be found when comparing the CR of all macular and disc measurements between the instruments. Compared to our previously published data repeatability has significantly improved with the inclusion of automatic tracking systems with both the Canon and Zeiss OCT.ConclusionAutomatic tracking function improves repeatability in both Canon OCT-HS100 and Zeiss Cirrus HD-OCT 5000. However, measurements generated by the two instruments are still not interchangeable.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%