土耳其患者网状假核膜的多模式成像。

Q3 Medicine
Serap Bilge Çeper, Filiz Afrashi, Cumali Değirmenci, Jale Menteş, Serhad Nalçacı, Cezmi Akkın
{"title":"土耳其患者网状假核膜的多模式成像。","authors":"Serap Bilge Çeper,&nbsp;Filiz Afrashi,&nbsp;Cumali Değirmenci,&nbsp;Jale Menteş,&nbsp;Serhad Nalçacı,&nbsp;Cezmi Akkın","doi":"10.4274/tjo.galenos.2023.85616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate the presence and prevalence of reticular pseudodrusen (RPD) in patients with age-related macular degeneration using multiple imaging modalities and to compare the sensitivity and specificity of these modalities in the detection of RPD.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Images from a total of 198 consecutive patients were analyzed prospectively. Color fundus photography, red-free imaging, spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT), infrared and blue reflectance (BR) imaging, fundus autofluorescence (FAF), enhanced-depth imaging OCT (EDI-OCT), fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) and indocyanine green angiography were performed. RPD was diagnosed in the presence of relevant findings in at least two of the imaging methods used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>RPD were detected in 149 eyes (37.6%). In the detection of RPD, color fundus photography, red-free photography, SD-OCT, infrared, FAF, BR, and FFA imaging had sensitivity values of 50%, 57.7%, 91.6%, 95%, 74.6%, 65.7%, and 28.2% and specificity values of 99.6%, 100%, 98.4%, 94.6%, 100%, 99.6%, and 69.8%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Infrared imaging had the highest sensitivity. SD-OCT combined with infrared imaging was the most sensitive imaging technique for detecting RPD. The high specificity of FAF, red-free, and BR imaging may be useful to confirm a diagnosis of RPD.</p>","PeriodicalId":23373,"journal":{"name":"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ba/4e/TJO-53-275.PMC10599339.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Multimodal Imaging of Reticular Pseudodrusen in Turkish Patients.\",\"authors\":\"Serap Bilge Çeper,&nbsp;Filiz Afrashi,&nbsp;Cumali Değirmenci,&nbsp;Jale Menteş,&nbsp;Serhad Nalçacı,&nbsp;Cezmi Akkın\",\"doi\":\"10.4274/tjo.galenos.2023.85616\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To investigate the presence and prevalence of reticular pseudodrusen (RPD) in patients with age-related macular degeneration using multiple imaging modalities and to compare the sensitivity and specificity of these modalities in the detection of RPD.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Images from a total of 198 consecutive patients were analyzed prospectively. Color fundus photography, red-free imaging, spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT), infrared and blue reflectance (BR) imaging, fundus autofluorescence (FAF), enhanced-depth imaging OCT (EDI-OCT), fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) and indocyanine green angiography were performed. RPD was diagnosed in the presence of relevant findings in at least two of the imaging methods used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>RPD were detected in 149 eyes (37.6%). In the detection of RPD, color fundus photography, red-free photography, SD-OCT, infrared, FAF, BR, and FFA imaging had sensitivity values of 50%, 57.7%, 91.6%, 95%, 74.6%, 65.7%, and 28.2% and specificity values of 99.6%, 100%, 98.4%, 94.6%, 100%, 99.6%, and 69.8%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Infrared imaging had the highest sensitivity. SD-OCT combined with infrared imaging was the most sensitive imaging technique for detecting RPD. The high specificity of FAF, red-free, and BR imaging may be useful to confirm a diagnosis of RPD.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23373,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ba/4e/TJO-53-275.PMC10599339.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4274/tjo.galenos.2023.85616\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/tjo.galenos.2023.85616","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:使用多种成像模式研究年龄相关性黄斑变性患者中网状假核膜(RPD)的存在和患病率,并比较这些模式在检测RPD中的敏感性和特异性。材料和方法:对198例连续患者的图像进行前瞻性分析。进行彩色眼底摄影、无红成像、光谱域光学相干断层扫描(SD-OCT)、红外和蓝色反射(BR)成像、眼底自发荧光(FAF)、增强深度成像OCT(EDI-OCT),眼底荧光素血管造影(FFA)和吲哚青绿血管造影。RPD是在至少两种使用的成像方法中存在相关发现的情况下诊断的。结果:149眼(37.6%)检出RPD,眼底彩色摄影、无红摄影、SD-OCT、红外、FAF、BR和FFA成像对RPD的敏感性分别为50%、57.7%、91.6%、95%、74.6%、65.7%和28.2%,特异性分别为99.6%、100%、98.4%、94.6%、100%和99.6%。结论:红外成像灵敏度最高。SD-OCT结合红外成像是检测RPD最灵敏的成像技术。FAF、无红和BR成像的高特异性可能有助于确认RPD的诊断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Multimodal Imaging of Reticular Pseudodrusen in Turkish Patients.

Multimodal Imaging of Reticular Pseudodrusen in Turkish Patients.

Multimodal Imaging of Reticular Pseudodrusen in Turkish Patients.

Multimodal Imaging of Reticular Pseudodrusen in Turkish Patients.

Objectives: To investigate the presence and prevalence of reticular pseudodrusen (RPD) in patients with age-related macular degeneration using multiple imaging modalities and to compare the sensitivity and specificity of these modalities in the detection of RPD.

Materials and methods: Images from a total of 198 consecutive patients were analyzed prospectively. Color fundus photography, red-free imaging, spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT), infrared and blue reflectance (BR) imaging, fundus autofluorescence (FAF), enhanced-depth imaging OCT (EDI-OCT), fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) and indocyanine green angiography were performed. RPD was diagnosed in the presence of relevant findings in at least two of the imaging methods used.

Results: RPD were detected in 149 eyes (37.6%). In the detection of RPD, color fundus photography, red-free photography, SD-OCT, infrared, FAF, BR, and FFA imaging had sensitivity values of 50%, 57.7%, 91.6%, 95%, 74.6%, 65.7%, and 28.2% and specificity values of 99.6%, 100%, 98.4%, 94.6%, 100%, 99.6%, and 69.8%, respectively.

Conclusion: Infrared imaging had the highest sensitivity. SD-OCT combined with infrared imaging was the most sensitive imaging technique for detecting RPD. The high specificity of FAF, red-free, and BR imaging may be useful to confirm a diagnosis of RPD.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology
Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology Medicine-Ophthalmology
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology (TJO) is the only scientific periodical publication of the Turkish Ophthalmological Association and has been published since January 1929. In its early years, the journal was published in Turkish and French. Although there were temporary interruptions in the publication of the journal due to various challenges, the Turkish Journal of Ophthalmology has been published continually from 1971 to the present. The target audience includes specialists and physicians in training in ophthalmology in all relevant disciplines.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信