77 research outputs found

    Impact of baseline Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale scores on visual outcomes in the VIVID-DME and VISTA-DME studies

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate intravitreal aflibercept versus laser in subgroups of patients with baseline Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Scale (DRSS) scores 6443, 47, and 6553 in VIVID-DME and VISTA-DME. METHODS: Patients with diabetic macular oedema were randomised to receive intravitreal aflibercept 2\u2009mg every 4 weeks (2q4), intravitreal aflibercept 2\u2009mg every 8 weeks after five initial monthly doses (2q8), or macular laser photocoagulation at baseline with sham injections at every visit. These post hoc analyses evaluate outcomes based on baseline DRSS scores in patients in the integrated dataset. The 2q4 and 2q8 treatment groups were also pooled. RESULTS: 748 patients had a baseline DRSS score based on fundus photographs ( 6443, n=301; 47, n=153; 6553, n=294). At week 100, the least squares mean difference between treatment groups (effect of intravitreal aflibercept above that of laser, adjusting for baseline best-corrected visual acuity) was 8.9 (95% CI 5.99 to 11.81), 9.7 (95% CI 5.54 to 13.91), and 11.0 (95%\u2009CI 7.96 to 14.1) letters in those with baseline DRSS scores 6443, 47, and 6553, respectively. The proportions of patients with 652\u2009step DRSS score improvement were greater in the intravitreal aflibercept group versus laser, respectively, for those with baseline DRSS scores of 6443 (13% vs 5.9%), 47 (25.8% vs 4.5%), and 6553 (64.5% vs 28.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of baseline DRSS score, functional outcomes were superior in intravitreal aflibercept-treated patients, demonstrating consistent treatment benefit across various baseline levels of retinopathy

    Estimation of current and post-treatment retinal function in chronic central serous chorioretinopathy using artificial intelligence

    Get PDF
    Refined understanding of the association of retinal microstructure with current and future (post-treatment) function in chronic central serous chorioretinopathy (cCSC) may help to identify patients that would benefit most from treatment. In this post-hoc analysis of data from the prospective, randomized PLACE trial (NCT01797861), we aimed to determine the accuracy of AI-based inference of retinal function from retinal morphology in cCSC. Longitudinal spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) data from 57 eyes of 57 patients from baseline, week 6-8 and month 7-8 post-treatment were segmented using deep-learning software. Fundus-controlled perimetry data were aligned to the SD-OCT data to extract layer thickness and reflectivity values for each test point. Point-wise retinal sensitivity could be inferred with a (leave-one-out) cross-validated mean absolute error (MAE) [95% CI] of 2.93 dB [2.40-3.46] (scenario 1) using random forest regression. With addition of patient-specific baseline data (scenario 2), retinal sensitivity at remaining follow-up visits was estimated even more accurately with a MAE of 1.07 dB [1.06-1.08]. In scenario 3, month 7-8 post-treatment retinal sensitivity was predicted from baseline SD-OCT data with a MAE of 3.38 dB [2.82-3.94]. Our study shows that localized retinal sensitivity can be inferred from retinal structure in cCSC using machine-learning. Especially, prediction of month 7-8 post-treatment sensitivity with consideration of the treatment as explanatory variable constitutes an important step toward personalized treatment decisions in cCSC.Ophthalmic researc

    Central serous chorioretinopathy: An evidence-based treatment guideline.

    Get PDF
    Central serous chorioretinopathy (CSC) is a relatively common disease that causes vision loss due to macular subretinal fluid leakage and it is often associated with reduced vision-related quality of life. In CSC, the leakage of subretinal fluid through defects in the retinal pigment epithelial layer's outer blood-retina barrier appears to occur secondary to choroidal abnormalities and dysfunction. The treatment of CSC is currently the subject of controversy, although recent data obtained from several large randomized controlled trials provide a wealth of new information that can be used to establish a treatment algorithm. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of our current understanding regarding the pathogenesis of CSC, current therapeutic strategies, and an evidence-based treatment guideline for CSC. In acute CSC, treatment can often be deferred for up to 3-4 months after diagnosis; however, early treatment with either half-dose or half-fluence photodynamic therapy (PDT) with the photosensitive dye verteporfin may be beneficial in selected cases. In chronic CSC, half-dose or half-fluence PDT, which targets the abnormal choroid, should be considered the preferred treatment. If PDT is unavailable, chronic CSC with focal, non-central leakage on angiography may be treated using conventional laser photocoagulation. CSC with concurrent macular neovascularization should be treated with half-dose/half-fluence PDT and/or intravitreal injections of an anti-vascular endothelial growth factor compound. Given the current shortage of verteporfin and the paucity of evidence supporting the efficacy of other treatment options, future studies-ideally, well-designed randomized controlled trials-are needed in order to evaluate new treatment options for CSC

    Disease-specific assessment of Vision Impairment in Low Luminance (VILL) in age-related macular degeneration – a MACUSTAR study report

    Get PDF
    Background/Aims: To further validate the Vision Impairment in Low Luminance (VILL) questionnaire, which captures visual functioning and vision-related quality of life under low luminance, low contrast conditions relevant to age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Methods: The VILL was translated from German into English (UK), Danish, Dutch, French, Italian and Portuguese. Rasch analysis was used to assess psychometric characteristics of 716 participants (65% female, mean age 72±7 years, 82% intermediate AMD) from the baseline visit of the MACUSTAR study. In a sub-set of participants (n=301), test-retest reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient, ICC; coefficient of repeatability, CoR) and construct validity were assessed. Results: Four items were removed from the VILL-37 due to misfit. The resulting VILL-33 has three subscales with no disordered thresholds and no misfitting items. No differential item functioning and no multidimensionality were observed. Person reliability and person separation index were 0.91 and 3.27 for the reading subscale (VILL-R), 0.87 and 2.58 for the mobility subscale (VILL-M) and 0.78 and 1.90 for the emotional subscale (VILL-E). ICC and CoR were 0.92 and 1.9 for VILL-R, 0.93 and 1.8 for VILL-M and 0.82 and 5.0 for VILL-E. Reported visionrelated quality of life decreased with advanced AMD stage (p<0.0001) and was lower in the intermediate AMD group than in the no AMD group (p≤0.0053). Conclusion: The VILL is a psychometrically sound patient-reported outcome instrument and the results further support its reliability and validity across all AMD stages. We recommend the shortened version of the questionnaire with three subscales (VILL-33) for future use. Trial registration number NCT03349801

    APOSTEL 2.0 recommendations for reporting quantitative optical coherence tomography studies

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: To update the consensus recommendations for reporting of quantitative optical coherence tomography (OCT) study results, thus revising the previously published Advised Protocol for OCT Study Terminology and Elements (APOSTEL) recommendations. METHODS: To identify studies reporting quantitative OCT results, we performed a PubMed search for the terms “quantitative” and “optical coherence tomography” from 2015 to 2017. Corresponding authors of the identified publications were invited to provide feedback on the initial APOSTEL recommendations via online surveys following the principle of a modified Delphi method. The results were evaluated and discussed by a panel of experts, and changes to the initial recommendations were proposed. A final survey was recirculated among the corresponding authors to obtain a majority vote on the proposed changes. RESULTS: One hundred sixteen authors participated in the surveys, resulting in 15 suggestions, of which 12 were finally accepted and incorporated into an updated 9-point-checklist. We harmonized the nomenclature of the outer retinal layers, added the exact area of measurement to the description of volume scans; we suggested reporting device-specific features. We advised to address potential bias in manual segmentation or manual correction of segmentation errors. References to specific reporting guidelines and room light conditions were removed. The participants’ consensus with the recommendations increased from 80% for the previous APOSTEL version to greater than 90%. CONCLUSIONS: The modified Delphi method resulted in an expert-led guideline (evidence class III, GRADE criteria) concerning study protocol, acquisition device, acquisition settings, scanning protocol, fundoscopic imaging, post-acquisition data selection, post-acquisition analysis, nomenclature and abbreviations, and statistical approach. It will still be essential to update these recommendations to new research and practices regularly
    corecore