May 2005
Volume 46, Issue 13
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2005
Comparison of Ultrasound and Intraoperative Finding in Patients With Vitreous Hemorrhage
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • S. Kim
    Ophthalmology, kosin university gospel hospital, Busan, Republic of Korea
  • S. Lee
    Ophthalmology, Kosin University Gospel Hospital, Busan, Republic of Korea
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  S. Kim, None; S. Lee, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2005, Vol.46, 5436. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      S. Kim, S. Lee; Comparison of Ultrasound and Intraoperative Finding in Patients With Vitreous Hemorrhage . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2005;46(13):5436.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Abstract: : Purpose: This study is aimed to find out how closely the preoperative diagnosis of retinal detachment(RD) by ultrasonography(U/S) matched the intraoperative findings in cases of vitreous hemorrhage(V–HEMO). Methods: A chart review of 81 patients (86 eyes) who have undergone pars plana vitrectomy in treatment of V–HEMO between June 1996 and June 2004. False–positive, false–negative, sensitivity and specificity for U/S were calculated from cases which U/S findings lead to diagnosis of RD and from cases which intraoperative findings actually proved RD. Results: The causes of V–HEMO were proliferative diabetic retinopathy(39 eyes, 45%), ocular trauma(22 eyes, 26%), posterior vitreous detachment with or without tear(12 eyes, 14%), retinal vascular occlusion(7eyes, 8%), and post–intraocular surgery(5 eyes, 6%). The false–positive rate for RD was 33% (8 of 24 eyes). The false–negative rate for RD was 10% (6 of 62 eyes). The sensitivity of U/S was calculated 73% and the specificity was calculated 90%. U/S within the PDR group has false–positive rate of 38%, false–negative rate of 19%, sensitivity of 62% and specificity of 81%. Such findings from the group excluded from the PDR group showed false–positive rate of 27%, false–negative rate of 3%, sensitivity of 89% and specificity of 92%. Conclusions: U/S for patients with PDR were proven to be rather inaccurate, with 62% sensitivity and 81% specificity ; while 89%, 92% respectively in non PDR group. It has been reported that U/S is an effective diagnostic tool in patients with media opacity but physician should bear in mind that U/S can be unreliable in some patients with PDR and thus the physician should have a care in making diagnosis.

Keywords: imaging methods (CT, FA, ICG, MRI, OCT, RTA, SLO, ultrasound) • retinal detachment • diabetic retinopathy 

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.