An evaluation of fundus photography and fundus autofluorescence in the diagnosis of cuticular drusen
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
An evaluation of fundus photography and fundus autofluorescence in the diagnosis of cuticular drusen. / Høeg, Tracy B; Moldow, Birgitte; Klein, Ronald; Dornonville de la Cour, Morten; Klemp, Kristian; Erngaard, Ditte; Ellervik, Christina; Buch, Helena.
In: British Journal of Ophthalmology, Vol. 100, No. 3, 03.2016, p. 378-82.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - An evaluation of fundus photography and fundus autofluorescence in the diagnosis of cuticular drusen
AU - Høeg, Tracy B
AU - Moldow, Birgitte
AU - Klein, Ronald
AU - Dornonville de la Cour, Morten
AU - Klemp, Kristian
AU - Erngaard, Ditte
AU - Ellervik, Christina
AU - Buch, Helena
N1 - Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
PY - 2016/3
Y1 - 2016/3
N2 - PURPOSE: To examine non-mydriatic fundus photography (FP) and fundus autofluorescence (FAF) as alternative non-invasive imaging modalities to fluorescein angiography (FA) in the detection of cuticular drusen (CD).METHODS: Among 2953 adults from the Danish Rural Eye Study (DRES) with gradable FP, three study groups were selected: (1) All those with suspected CD without age-related macular degeneration (AMD) on FP, (2) all those with suspected CD with AMD on FP and (3) a randomly selected group with early AMD. Groups 1, 2 and 3 underwent FA and FAF and group 4 underwent FAF only as part of DRES CD substudy. Main outcome measures included percentage of correct positive and correct negative diagnoses, Cohen's κ and prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted κ (PABAK) coefficients of test and grader reliability.RESULTS: CD was correctly identified on FP 88.9% of the time and correctly identified as not being present 83.3% of the time. CD was correctly identified on FAF 62.0% of the time and correctly identified as not being present 100.0% of the time. Compared with FA, FP has a PABAK of 0.75 (0.60 to 1.5) and FAF a PABAK of 0.44 (0.23 to 0.95).CONCLUSIONS: FP is a promising, non-invasive substitute for FA in the diagnosis of CD. FAF was less reliable than FP to detect CD.
AB - PURPOSE: To examine non-mydriatic fundus photography (FP) and fundus autofluorescence (FAF) as alternative non-invasive imaging modalities to fluorescein angiography (FA) in the detection of cuticular drusen (CD).METHODS: Among 2953 adults from the Danish Rural Eye Study (DRES) with gradable FP, three study groups were selected: (1) All those with suspected CD without age-related macular degeneration (AMD) on FP, (2) all those with suspected CD with AMD on FP and (3) a randomly selected group with early AMD. Groups 1, 2 and 3 underwent FA and FAF and group 4 underwent FAF only as part of DRES CD substudy. Main outcome measures included percentage of correct positive and correct negative diagnoses, Cohen's κ and prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted κ (PABAK) coefficients of test and grader reliability.RESULTS: CD was correctly identified on FP 88.9% of the time and correctly identified as not being present 83.3% of the time. CD was correctly identified on FAF 62.0% of the time and correctly identified as not being present 100.0% of the time. Compared with FA, FP has a PABAK of 0.75 (0.60 to 1.5) and FAF a PABAK of 0.44 (0.23 to 0.95).CONCLUSIONS: FP is a promising, non-invasive substitute for FA in the diagnosis of CD. FAF was less reliable than FP to detect CD.
KW - Adult
KW - Aged
KW - Aged, 80 and over
KW - Bruch Membrane
KW - Denmark
KW - Eye Diseases, Hereditary
KW - Female
KW - Fundus Oculi
KW - Humans
KW - Male
KW - Middle Aged
KW - Observer Variation
KW - Optical Imaging
KW - Photography
KW - Retina
KW - Retinal Drusen
KW - Rural Population
KW - Young Adult
KW - Journal Article
U2 - 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307197
DO - 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307197
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 26216869
VL - 100
SP - 378
EP - 382
JO - British Journal of Ophthalmology
JF - British Journal of Ophthalmology
SN - 0007-1161
IS - 3
ER -
ID: 164155554