Abstract
Purpose :
Oral fluorescein angiography (O-FA) can be an alternative to avoid difficulties associated with intravenous fluorescein angiography (IV-FA).
We performed a prospective, longitudinal, comparative study to determine whether O-FA can be useful for diagnosis and follow-up in patients with diabetic retinopathy comparing their quality and fluorescence with IV-FA.
Methods :
Sixty-four patients underwent fluorescein angiography (FA), with 31 patients undergoing oral FA (O-FA) and 33 patients undergoing intravenous FA (IV-FA), utilizing the Clarus 700 system (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA). Subsequently, two masked graders meticulously assessed the images to evaluate three critical parameters: branch retinal identification, visualization of the foveal avascular zone, and identification of useful clinical features. The outcomes were graded to assign a quality score, with a maximum score of 9 denoting optimal quality. Additionally, a histogram analysis was conducted to quantify fluorescence intensity in each image, facilitating a comparison between the two techniques. Furthermore, the study included a comparison of side effects associated with each technique.
Results :
The image quality was considered high in 83.59% of images with no differences between VO-FA and IV-FAG (mean 8.54 O-FAG [95% CI 8.12-8.97] vs mean 8.89 IV-FAG [95% CI 8.80- 8. 97]). Mean fluorescence were 76.38 (95% CI 68.40-84.36, SD 21.76 to O-FAG) and 78.79 (95% CI 70.69-86.88, SD 22.83 to IV-FAG) with no statistically significant differences between the two techniques (Image 1). Side effects of oral fluorescein angiography were 3.12%.
Image 2 shows an example of high-quality score by both graders.
Conclusions :
O-FA is a useful alternative to IV-FA in diagnosis and follow up of diabetic retinopathy, with no significant differences in image quality and fluorescence score between the two techniques.
This abstract was presented at the 2024 ARVO Imaging in the Eye Conference, held in Seattle, WA, May 4, 2024.