Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28180033›Full record

ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2017

Platform-Independent Cirrus and Spectralis Thickness Measurements in Eyes with Diabetic Macular Edema Using Fully Automated Software.

Alex S Willoughby, Stephanie J Chiu, Rachel K Silverman, Sina Farsiu, Clare Bailey, Henry E Wiley, Frederick L Ferris, Glenn J Jaffe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Comparison between two multimodal imaging platforms: Nidek Mirante and Heidelberg Spectralis.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2021
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Diabetic macular edema: Evidence-based management.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2018
    Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Alex S WilloughbyDepartment of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Stephanie J ChiuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Rachel K SilvermanDepartment of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Sina FarsiuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
Clare BaileyUniversity Hospitals Bristol National Health Service Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK.
Henry E WileyNational Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD, USA.
Frederick L FerrisNational Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD, USA.
Glenn J JaffeDepartment of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.

Funding

VISION RESEARCHP30EY005722 · NEI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI Vadim Y Arshavsky · 1985 to 2026
$19.3M
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY005722
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe determine whether the automated segmentation software, Duke Optical Coherence Tomography Retinal Analysis Program (DOCTRAP), can measure, in a platform-independent manner, retinal thickness on Cirrus and Spectralis spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) images in eyes with diabetic macular edema (DME) under treatment in a clinical trial.

methodsAutomatic segmentation software was used to segment the internal limiting membrane (ILM), inner retinal pigment epithelium (RPE), and Bruch's membrane (BM) in SD-OCT images acquired by Cirrus and Spectralis commercial systems, from the same eye, on the same day during a clinical interventional DME trial. Mean retinal thickness differences were compared across commercial and DOCTRAP platforms using intraclass correlation (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots.

resultsThe mean 1 mm central subfield thickness difference (standard error [SE]) comparing segmentation of Spectralis images with DOCTRAP versus HEYEX was 0.7 (0.3) μm (0.2 pixels). The corresponding values comparing segmentation of Cirrus images with DOCTRAP versus Cirrus software was 2.2 (0.7) μm. The mean 1 mm central subfield thickness difference (SE) comparing segmentation of Cirrus and Spectralis scan pairs with DOCTRAP using BM as the outer retinal boundary was -2.3 (0.9) μm compared to 2.8 (0.9) μm with inner RPE as the outer boundary.

conclusionsDOCTRAP segmentation of Cirrus and Spectralis images produces validated thickness measurements that are very similar to each other, and very similar to the values generated by the corresponding commercial software in eyes with treated DME. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: This software enables automatic total retinal thickness measurements across two OCT platforms, a process that is impractical to perform manually.

Indexed as

diabetic macular edemadiabetic retinopathyoptical coherence tomography

Identifiers

PMID28180033
PMCPMC5295813

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.