June 2023
Volume 64, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2023
Multimodal imaging risk factors predictive of small choroidal melanocytic lesion growth to melanoma: An educational study and pictorial guide
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Trisha Yuuno Castillo Pecoraro
    Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, United States
  • Robert Churchill
    Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota, United States
  • Andrea A. Tooley
    Mayo Clinic Minnesota, Rochester, Minnesota, United States
  • Odette Houghton
    Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, Arizona, United States
  • Arman Mashayekhi
    Mayo Clinic in Florida, Jacksonville, Florida, United States
  • Lauren A Dalvin
    Mayo Clinic Minnesota, Rochester, Minnesota, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Trisha Pecoraro None; Robert Churchill None; Andrea Tooley None; Odette Houghton None; Arman Mashayekhi None; Lauren Dalvin None
  • Footnotes
    Support  Leonard and Mary Lou Hoeft Career Development Award Fund in Ophthalmology Research Grant P30 CA015083, CTSA Grant KL2 TR002379
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2023, Vol.64, 897. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Trisha Yuuno Castillo Pecoraro, Robert Churchill, Andrea A. Tooley, Odette Houghton, Arman Mashayekhi, Lauren A Dalvin; Multimodal imaging risk factors predictive of small choroidal melanocytic lesion growth to melanoma: An educational study and pictorial guide. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2023;64(8):897.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Risk factors for small choroidal melanocytic lesion growth to melanoma have been redefined using multimodal imaging. We explored provider ability to recognize risk factors for small choroidal melanocytic lesion growth to melanoma before and after image-based education and with and without multimodal imaging.

Methods : Providers were invited to participate in a survey assessing ability to identify risk factors for small choroidal melanocytic lesion growth to melanoma using either fundus imaging alone or multimodal imaging. Risk factors included thickness >2mm on ultrasonography, subretinal fluid on optical coherence tomography, presence of orange pigment by autofluorescence, acoustic hollowness by ultrasonography, and diameter >5mm by fundus imaging. Performance was assessed before and after participants reviewed an educational PowerPoint providing pictorial examples of risk factors. Comparison between groups was conducted using two-tailed Fisher’s exact test.

Results : Thirty and 26 providers completed the pre-education and post-education assessments, respectively. Post-education participants were more accurate within ±1 risk factor for lesions with zero risk factors (77% vs. 100%, p=0.01) or two risk factors (79% vs. 91%, p=0.03). Following education, participants presented with multimodal imaging (compared with single fundus images) more often correctly identified lesions with four (12% vs. 42%, p=0.03) or five (4% vs. 39%, p=0.004) risk factors, demonstrated lower mean level of concern for lesions with zero risk factors (2.0 vs. 1.4, p<0.001), and expressed higher level of concern for lesions with 5 risk factors (2.4 vs. 3.6, p<0.001).

Conclusions : Use of multimodal imaging may be more beneficial than education itself to improve accuracy of risk factor identification for small choroidal melanocytic lesions.

This abstract was presented at the 2023 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in New Orleans, LA, April 23-27, 2023.

 

Table 1. Participant responses using single fundus and multimodal imaging before and after educational intervention

Table 1. Participant responses using single fundus and multimodal imaging before and after educational intervention

 

Table 2. Comparison of participant responses when presented with single fundus versus multimodal imaging

Table 2. Comparison of participant responses when presented with single fundus versus multimodal imaging

×
×

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.

×