July 2020
Volume 61, Issue 9
Open Access
ARVO Imaging in the Eye Conference Abstract  |   July 2020
Neighboring B-scan averaging for improved visualization of retinal substructures with SS-OCT
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Thomas Callan
    Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., Dublin, California, United States
  • Sophie Kubach
    Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., Dublin, California, United States
  • Simon Antonio Bello
    Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., Dublin, California, United States
  • Warren Lewis
    Bayside Photonics Inc., Yellow Springs, Ohio, United States
  • Nolleisha Graves
    Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., Dublin, California, United States
  • Mary Durbin
    Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., Dublin, California, United States
  • Roger A. Goldberg
    Bay Area Retina Associates, Walnut Creek, California, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Thomas Callan, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc. (E); Sophie Kubach, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc. (E); Simon Bello, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc. (E); Warren Lewis, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc. (C); Nolleisha Graves, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc. (C); Mary Durbin, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc. (E); Roger Goldberg, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc. (C)
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science July 2020, Vol.61, PB0024. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Thomas Callan, Sophie Kubach, Simon Antonio Bello, Warren Lewis, Nolleisha Graves, Mary Durbin, Roger A. Goldberg; Neighboring B-scan averaging for improved visualization of retinal substructures with SS-OCT. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2020;61(9):PB0024.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Image quality is one of the most important factors when using optical coherence tomography (OCT) as a diagnostic tool. Speckle artifacts and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) heavily influence the appearance of B-scans. This study analyzed the effectiveness of averaging neighboring B-scans for improving image quality and the visualization of retinal substructures in the B-scans from volume images.

Methods : Images were acquired from both healthy and diseased eyes with a prototype PLEX® Elite 9000 (ZEISS, Dublin, CA) swept-source OCT that acquired scans at both 100 kHz and 200 kHz scan speeds. A minimum of 25 scans were included from the following list of scan types: Angio 3x3 mm with a B-scan spacing (BSS) of 10 microns, 6x6 (BSS:12um), 9x9 (18), 12x12 (24), HD 12x12 (15) 15x9 (18) and Cube 1024x1024 (12), 800x800 (15) and 512x512 (24) structure scans.

Two sets of scans were created. One set used the traditional processing for an individual B-scan. The second set was processed by averaging the primary B-scan with all neighbors acquired within 36um, Averages included either 3 or 2 B-scans. For grading, both the original and the neighbor-averaged B-scans were displayed side-by-side to an expert grader. A rating scale of 1-5 was used to assess the image quality comparison. A minimum of 6 B-scans were selected from each volume and compared between the two formats prior to determining a single grade for each comparison.

Results : A total of 283 scans (49 healthy, 234 disease) were processed and the pairs compared and graded. At least 73% or more of the averaged-neighbor scans were preferred (grade 4 or 5) in all scan categories except for the HD Angio 12x12 mm (see Table 1). The remaining averaged neighbor B-scans were as good or better than the single scan but did not show the overwhelming preference as the other scans. The benefit from enhancing the B-scans is most pronounced for the Angio 6 x 6 mm ONH scans followed by the 1024x1024 mm cube scans.

Conclusions : Utilizing the neighboring B-scan was shown to improve most B-scans in this comparison study. There did not appear to be any detriment to visualizing small features with neighbor averaging. The averaged B-scan showed greater detail, less graininess, and improved clarity of the layers (see Figure 1).

This is a 2020 Imaging in the Eye Conference abstract.

 

Table 1: Comparison grades showing average scores and percentages

Table 1: Comparison grades showing average scores and percentages

 

Figure 1 a-d: Two examples of the single B-scan (left) and neighbor B-scan averaging (right)

Figure 1 a-d: Two examples of the single B-scan (left) and neighbor B-scan averaging (right)

×
×

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.

×