June 2022
Volume 63, Issue 7
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2022
Three-dimensional choroidal contour mapping in pathology:comparison with healthy controls
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Supriya Arora
    Ophthalmology, Princess Margaret Hospital, New Providence, Nassau, Bahamas
    Bahamas Vision Centre, New Providence, Nassau, Bahamas
  • Brian Rosario
    UPMC, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
  • Amrish Selvam
    UPMC, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
  • Vinisha Sant
    UPMC, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
  • Mohammed Nasar Ibrahim
    University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
  • Jose Alain Sahel
    UPMC, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
  • Kiran Kumar Vupparaboina
    University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
  • Jay Chhablani
    UPMC, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
    University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Supriya Arora None; Brian Rosario None; Amrish Selvam None; Vinisha Sant None; Mohammed Ibrahim None; Jose Sahel Pixium Vision, GenSight Biologics, SparingVision, Prophesee, Chronolife, Code I (Personal Financial Interest), Pixium Vision, GenSight Biologics, SparingVision, Code S (non-remunerative); Kiran Vupparaboina None; Jay Chhablani Allergan, Salutaris, Novartis, Biogen, Code C (Consultant/Contractor)
  • Footnotes
    Support  ​​This work was supported by NIH CORE Grant P30 EY08098 to the Department of Ophthalmology, the Eye and Ear Foundation of Pittsburgh, and from an unrestricted grant from Research to Prevent Blindness, New York, NY.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2022, Vol.63, 483 – A0020. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Supriya Arora, Brian Rosario, Amrish Selvam, Vinisha Sant, Mohammed Nasar Ibrahim, Jose Alain Sahel, Kiran Kumar Vupparaboina, Jay Chhablani; Three-dimensional choroidal contour mapping in pathology:comparison with healthy controls. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2022;63(7):483 – A0020.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : To study the choroidal contour map in central serous chorioretinopathy (CSCR) and age related macular degeneration (AMD) and compare with healthy controls.

Methods : Retrospective analysis on 13 healthy eyes, 12 eyes with CSCR and 8 eyes with AMD was performed. Volumetric scans were captured using a widefield swept source optical coherence tomography and CIS and COS in 3D were obtained using previously validated residual U-net (ResUnet) deep learning model for choroidal segmentation. Qualitative analysis of CIS and COS was performed using custom built MATLAB based 3D visualization tool and the choroidal contour shapes were determined in the order of decreasing steepness. Quantitative analysis was based on maximum principal curvature (Pmax) of the surface which was calculated at the center, superior, inferior, nasal and temporal macula.

Results : Qualitative evaluation of CIS demonstrated the shape of a bell, hump, crescent, arc and cupid’s bow in 4,3,2,2 and 2 in normal eyes; 2,6,4,0,0 in CSCR eyes and 0,5,2,1,0 in AMD eyes respectively. Qualitative analysis of COS demonstrated the shape of a bell, hump, crescent, arc and cupid’s bow in 2,6,2,1,2 in normal eyes; 2,8,1,0,1 in CSCR eyes and 0,6,1,1,0 in AMD eyes. On quantitative analysis of CIS, Pmax at central macula was -0.23, 0.45 and -0.02 in normal eyes, CSCR and AMD respectively (p=0.015). Similarly, Pmax in superior, inferior and temporal macula was significantly different between the 3 groups (p=0.001,0.029,0.019).The difference between CIS and COS was the highest for AMD group (-6.73±2.2) as compared to normal eyes (-2.5±0.4) and CSCR (-2.8±1.7)(p=0.038). On making a comparison within the group, the central Pmax, superior Pmax, inferior Pmax and temporal Pmax between the CIS and COS of normal eyes (p=0.0002,0.00003,0.004,0.003), CSCR (p=0.006,0.001,0.0003,0.033) and AMD (p=0.009,0.005,0.006,0.005) were significantly different from each other.

Conclusions : Choroidal contour was steeper in CSCR and flatter in AMD as compared to normal eyes. More data is continuously being added and will be presented at the meeting.

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

 

Graphical user interface demonstrating quantitative and qualitative analysis.

Graphical user interface demonstrating quantitative and qualitative analysis.

 

A) Volumetric B scans used to generate 3D model of CIS and COS.
CIS and COS in B) an eye with CSCR has a bell and hump shape C) AMD has arc and arc shape and D) normal eye has crescent and hump shape respectively.

A) Volumetric B scans used to generate 3D model of CIS and COS.
CIS and COS in B) an eye with CSCR has a bell and hump shape C) AMD has arc and arc shape and D) normal eye has crescent and hump shape respectively.

×
×

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.

×