Comparison of Multiple Techniques for Measuring Geographic Atrophy: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

IF 0.9 4区医学 Q4 OPHTHALMOLOGY

Ophthalmic surgery, lasers & imaging retina Pub Date : 2025-03-01 DOI:10.3928/23258160-20250214-03

Tiago N O Rassi, William W Binotti, Eduardo Mund Carreirao Danielli, Sacha Pereira Fernandes, Daniela Cristina Schroff Machado, Dillan Cunha Amaral, Eduardo A Novais, Ricardo Noguera Louzada, Fernando Marcondes Penha, Mauricio Maia, Jay S Duker

{"title":"Comparison of Multiple Techniques for Measuring Geographic Atrophy: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Tiago N O Rassi, William W Binotti, Eduardo Mund Carreirao Danielli, Sacha Pereira Fernandes, Daniela Cristina Schroff Machado, Dillan Cunha Amaral, Eduardo A Novais, Ricardo Noguera Louzada, Fernando Marcondes Penha, Mauricio Maia, Jay S Duker","doi":"10.3928/23258160-20250214-03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study compared techniques for measuring geographic atrophy (GA) against the standard autofluorescence blue (AF-Blue). The design was a Bayesian network meta-analysis. PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane were searched for studies comparing GA imaging techniques. AF-Blue, autofluorescence green (AF-Green), autofluorescence infrared (AF-IR), near-infrared reflectance (NIR), multicolor autofluorescence AF (MC-AF), optical coherence tomography fundus image (OFI), en face sub-retinal pigment epithelium (SubRPE) slab, OCT angiography (OCTA), color fundus photography (CFP), and fluorescein angiography (FA) were included. A ratio of means (ROM) meta-analysis using a threshold based on an established minimally important difference was performed. (Pros-pero ID: CRD42023476459.) Included were 2,001 eyes from 18 studies and no significant differences among measurement techniques was found. The ROM showed that CFP, OCTA, SubRPE slab, OFI, and IR reflectance agreed well with AF-Blue. However, AF-Green, FA, and MC underestimated GA, and AF-IR overestimated it. It appears that there is a fair agreement between AF-Blue and current techniques for measuring GA. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina 2025;56:XX-XX.].","PeriodicalId":19679,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmic surgery, lasers & imaging retina","volume":" ","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmic surgery, lasers & imaging retina","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3928/23258160-20250214-03","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study compared techniques for measuring geographic atrophy (GA) against the standard autofluorescence blue (AF-Blue). The design was a Bayesian network meta-analysis. PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane were searched for studies comparing GA imaging techniques. AF-Blue, autofluorescence green (AF-Green), autofluorescence infrared (AF-IR), near-infrared reflectance (NIR), multicolor autofluorescence AF (MC-AF), optical coherence tomography fundus image (OFI), en face sub-retinal pigment epithelium (SubRPE) slab, OCT angiography (OCTA), color fundus photography (CFP), and fluorescein angiography (FA) were included. A ratio of means (ROM) meta-analysis using a threshold based on an established minimally important difference was performed. (Pros-pero ID: CRD42023476459.) Included were 2,001 eyes from 18 studies and no significant differences among measurement techniques was found. The ROM showed that CFP, OCTA, SubRPE slab, OFI, and IR reflectance agreed well with AF-Blue. However, AF-Green, FA, and MC underestimated GA, and AF-IR overestimated it. It appears that there is a fair agreement between AF-Blue and current techniques for measuring GA. [Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging Retina 2025;56:XX-XX.].

查看原文本刊更多论文

测量地理萎缩的多种技术之比较：系统回顾与网络元分析。

本研究比较了测量地理萎缩（GA）和标准自体荧光蓝（AF-Blue）的技术。设计采用贝叶斯网络元分析。PubMed， Scopus和Cochrane检索了比较GA成像技术的研究。包括AF-蓝、自身荧光绿（AF- green）、自身荧光红外（AF- ir）、近红外反射（NIR）、多色自身荧光AF （MC-AF）、光学相干断层扫描眼底图像（OFI）、面视网膜下色素上皮（SubRPE）板、OCT血管造影（OCTA）、彩色眼底摄影（CFP）和荧光素血管造影（FA）。采用基于已确定的最小重要差异的阈值进行均值比（ROM） meta分析。（pro -pero ID: CRD42023476459.）纳入了来自18项研究的2001只眼睛，在测量技术之间没有发现显著差异。ROM显示CFP， OCTA， subpe板，OFI和IR反射率与AF-Blue一致。然而，AF-Green、FA和MC低估了GA，而AF-IR高估了GA。看来AF-Blue和当前测量GA的技术之间有一个公平的协议。[眼科外科激光成像视网膜2025；56:XX-XX]。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Ophthalmic surgery, lasers & imaging retina OPHTHALMOLOGY-SURGERY

CiteScore

1.80

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： OSLI Retina focuses exclusively on retinal diseases, surgery and pharmacotherapy. OSLI Retina will offer an expedited submission to publication effort of peer-reviewed clinical science and case report articles. The front of the journal offers practical clinical and practice management features and columns specific to retina specialists. In sum, readers will find important peer-reviewed retina articles and the latest findings in techniques and science, as well as informative business and practice management features in one journal.