June 2022
Volume 63, Issue 7
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2022
Inter-device and inter-scan comparability of drusen volume assessments in age-related macular degeneration: A MACUSTAR report
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Davide Garzone
    Department of Ophthalmology, Universitatsklinikum Bonn, Bonn, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany
    Population Health Science, Deutsches Zentrum fur Neurodegenerative Erkrankungen eV, Bonn, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany
  • Robert P Finger
    Department of Ophthalmology, Universitatsklinikum Bonn, Bonn, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany
  • Olivier Morelle
    Department of Ophthalmology, Universitatsklinikum Bonn, Bonn, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany
    B-IT and Institute of Informatics, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universitat Bonn, Bonn, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany
  • Maximilian W M Wintergerst
    Department of Ophthalmology, Universitatsklinikum Bonn, Bonn, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany
  • Marlene Sassmannshausen
    Department of Ophthalmology, Universitatsklinikum Bonn, Bonn, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany
  • Steffen Schmitz-Valckenberg
    Department of Ophthalmology, Universitatsklinikum Bonn, Bonn, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany
    Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, University of Utah Health John A Moran Eye Center, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States
  • Maximilian Pfau
    Department of Ophthalmology, Universitatsklinikum Bonn, Bonn, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany
  • Sarah Thiele
    Department of Ophthalmology, Universitatsklinikum Bonn, Bonn, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany
  • Stephen Poor
    Ophthalmology, Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research Inc, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States
  • Sergio Leal
    Bayer Pharma AG, Berlin, Berlin, Germany
  • Frank G Holz
    Department of Ophthalmology, Universitatsklinikum Bonn, Bonn, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany
  • Jan Henrik Terheyden
    Department of Ophthalmology, Universitatsklinikum Bonn, Bonn, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Davide Garzone None; Robert Finger Bayer, Novartis , Roche/Genentech , Allergan, Alimera, Böhringer-Ingelheim, Santhera, Ellex, ProQR , Opthea, Oxford Innovation, Code C (Consultant/Contractor), Novartis, Zeiss, Heidelberg Engineering, CentreVue, Biogen, Code F (Financial Support); Olivier Morelle None; Maximilian Wintergerst Heine Optotechnik GmbH, Code C (Consultant/Contractor), BONFOR GEROK Program, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bonn, Else Kröner-Fresenius Stiftung, Bundesministerium für Wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung (BMZ), CenterVue SpA , Berlin-Chemie AG , Deutschen Ophthalmologische Gesellschaft (DOG) ,Heine Optotechnik GmbH, Novartis Pharma GmbH , Heidelberg Engineering, Optos , Carl Zeiss Meditec , D-Eye Srl, Eyenuk, Inc., Code F (Financial Support), ASKIN & CO GmbH Heine Optotechnik GmbH DigiSight Technologies Berlin-Chemie AG European Society of Retina Specialists (EURETINA) Deutschen Akademischen Austauschdienstes (DAAD) Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO), Code R (Recipient); Marlene Sassmannshausen Heidelberg Engineering, CenterVue, Carl Zeiss MedicTec, Code F (Financial Support); Steffen Schmitz-Valckenberg AlphaRET, Apellis, Bioeq, Katairo, Kubota Vision, Novartis, Oxurion, Pixium, Roche, SparingVision, Code C (Consultant/Contractor), Bayer, Carl Zeiss MediTec, Heidelberg Engineering, Novartis, Roche, Code F (Financial Support), STZ GRADE Reading Center, Code O (Owner), Apellis, Heidelberg Engineering, Code R (Recipient); Maximilian Pfau Apellis pharmaceuticals, Code C (Consultant/Contractor); Sarah Thiele Heidelberg Engineering, Optos, Zeiss, CenterVue, Code F (Financial Support), Heidelberg Engineering, Novartis, Bayer, Allergan, Code R (Recipient); Stephen Poor Novartis, Code E (Employment); Sergio Leal Bayer Consumer Care AG, Code E (Employment); Frank Holz Acucela, Apellis, Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Bioeq/Formycon, Roche/Genentech, Geuder, Graybug, Gyroscope, Heidelberg Engineering, IvericBio, Kanghong, LinBioscience, Novartis, Oxurion, Pixium Vision, Stealth BioTherapeutics, Zeiss, Code C (Consultant/Contractor), Acucela, Allergan, Apellis, Bayer, Bioeq/Formycon, CenterVue, Ellex, Roche/Genentech, Geuder, Heidelberg Engineering, IvericBio, Kanghong, NightStarX, Novartis, Optos, Pixium Vision, Zeiss, Code F (Financial Support), GRADE Reading Center, Code O (Owner); Jan Terheyden Heidelberg Engineering, Optos, Zeiss, CenterVue, Code F (Financial Support), Okko health, Code R (Recipient)
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2022, Vol.63, 1016 – F0263. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Davide Garzone, Robert P Finger, Olivier Morelle, Maximilian W M Wintergerst, Marlene Sassmannshausen, Steffen Schmitz-Valckenberg, Maximilian Pfau, Sarah Thiele, Stephen Poor, Sergio Leal, Frank G Holz, Jan Henrik Terheyden; Inter-device and inter-scan comparability of drusen volume assessments in age-related macular degeneration: A MACUSTAR report. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2022;63(7):1016 – F0263.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Optical coherence tomography (OCT)-based drusen volume quantification is a relevant biomarker in age-related macular degeneration (AMD). An FDA-approved automated software for quantifying drusen volume using Cirrus (Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA) is available, however the comparability with similar approaches on other devices is largely unknown. Hence, we compared drusen volume measured by a newly developed, automated software running on Spectralis OCT data (Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany) against the above-mentioned software on Cirrus.

Methods : We included 306 eyes from 159 individuals with bilateral intermediate (iAMD, n=133) or early (eAMD, n=26) AMD, both reading center confirmed using multi-modal imaging. The Spectralis imaging protocol included a 20°×20° (25 B-scans) and a 30°×25° macular volume scan (241 B-scans), while the Cirrus protocol included a 200×200 macular cube. We assessed inter-device and inter-scan differences in 3- and 5mm diameter fovea-centered grid with intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) and root mean squared error (RMSE). Furthermore, we calculated the agreement based on exceeding a drusen volume cut-off indicating higher AMD progression risk (previously shown at >0.03mm3 for Cirrus, set at >0.09mm3 for Spectralis by adding the mean difference between the two devices to 0.03).

Results : Mean age of participants was 71.3±7.4 years. In the 5-mm diameter grid, no drusen were detected in 2 eyes (0.6%) in the Spectralis 241 B-scans, in 13 eyes (4%) in the 25 B-scans and 75 eyes (23.6%) in Cirrus scans. Agreement on drusen volume measurements was high between the two Spectralis scans (ICC 0.993 [0.991-0.994]). Drusen volume measurements between the denser Spectralis scan and Cirrus showed good reliability (ICC 0.803 [0.76-0.84]); the RMSE was 0.007 in eAMD and 0.106 in iAMD. Considering the cut-off mentioned above, agreement (kappa) between the two Spectralis scans was 97.4 (0.94); while with Cirrus it was 89.3 (0.77) for 241 B-scans and 89.4 (0.77) for 25 B-scans, respectively.

Conclusions : Drusen volume measures across the two softwares are not interchangeable. Comparability improves using a binary cut-off. Less dense scan patterns decrease sensitivity of drusen detection in Spectralis OCT scans.

This abstract was presented at the 2022 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Denver, CO, May 1-4, 2022, and virtually.

 

Figure 1. Bland-Altman plot of Spectralis 241 B-scans and Cirrus drusen volume measurements.

Figure 1. Bland-Altman plot of Spectralis 241 B-scans and Cirrus drusen volume measurements.

×
×

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.

×