July 2018
Volume 59, Issue 9
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   July 2018
Accuracy and reproducibility of peripapillary microvasculature quantification using ZEISS AngioPlex Metrix™
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Ali Fard
    Carl Zeiss Meditec Inc., Dublin, California, United States
  • Homayoun Bagherinia
    Carl Zeiss Meditec Inc., Dublin, California, United States
  • Archana Kolli
    Carl Zeiss Meditec Inc., Dublin, California, United States
  • Mary K Durbin
    Carl Zeiss Meditec Inc., Dublin, California, United States
  • Jochen Straub
    Carl Zeiss Meditec Inc., Dublin, California, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Ali Fard, Carl Zeiss Meditec (E); Homayoun Bagherinia, Carl Zeiss Meditec (E); Archana Kolli, Carl Zeiss Meditec (E); Mary Durbin, Carl Zeiss Meditec (E); Jochen Straub, Carl Zeiss Meditec (E)
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science July 2018, Vol.59, 5071. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Ali Fard, Homayoun Bagherinia, Archana Kolli, Mary K Durbin, Jochen Straub; Accuracy and reproducibility of peripapillary microvasculature quantification using ZEISS AngioPlex Metrix™. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2018;59(9):5071.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Vasculature analysis using optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) has been suggested as a valuable metric in diagnosis of eye diseases such as glaucoma. The purpose of this study is to investigate the accuracy and reproducibility of capillary perfusion measurement within peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) among normal and glaucoma subjects using AngioPlex Metrix (ZEISS, Dublin, CA).

Methods : Normal (N=14) and glaucoma (N=15) subjects were enrolled in this study. One eye per subject was randomly selected for the purpose of evaluating the accuracy and reproducibility of quantification. Each eye was scanned using a CIRRUS HD-OCT 5000 (ZEISS, Dublin, CA) OCTA scan (350x350 A-scans; 4.5mm x 4.5mm) 3 times on 3 instruments. Subsequently, the OCT data were segmented, enface RNFL vasculature maps were created, and capillary areas were measured using an automated algorithm. Capillary perfusion density and flux index were calculated over an annulus with inner and outer diameters of 2mm and 4.5 mm, centered at the optic disc. To evaluate the accuracy of perfusion density, 5 normal and 5 glaucoma images were randomly selected and four regions of interest (ROI) were identified in each image. Three graders trained in segmenting OCTA images marked the capillary areas within the ROIs. The results were then compared with the algorithm output. To evaluate the reproducibility, an analysis of variance was used to calculate the intraclass correlation (ICC), coefficient of variation, and reproducibility standard deviation among the combined normal and glaucoma population.

Results : Capillary perfusion density calculated by the algorithm was compared with the mean of graders’ marking. Fig. 1 shows the Bland-Altman plot of the mean of graders and the algorithm. In 39 out of 40 test cases, the differences between mean of graders and algorithm were found to be within the 95% limits of agreement. The ICC for capillary flux index and perfusion density were >0.70 and >0.86, respectively. Table 1 summarizes the results for each quadrant within the annulus.

Conclusions : Our results suggest that peripapillary microvasculature quantification using AngioPlex Metrix is highly accurate compared with manual grading and is repeatable and reproducible for population of normal and glaucoma.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2018 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Honolulu, Hawaii, April 29 - May 3, 2018.

 

Fig 1. Agreement between manual grading and algorithm.

Fig 1. Agreement between manual grading and algorithm.

 

Table 1. Summary of accuracy and reproducibility results

Table 1. Summary of accuracy and reproducibility results

×
×

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.

×