Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36456704›Full record

SynthesisEye (London, England)2023

Diagnostic accuracy of OCTA and OCT for myopic choroidal neovascularisation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Sharon Ho, Angelica Ly, Kyoko Ohno-Matsui, Michael Kalloniatis, Gordon S Doig

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Eye (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Differential diagnosis of myopic choroidal neovascularization (mCNV): insights from multimodal imaging and treatment implications.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Current Topics in OCT Applications in Vitreoretinal Surgery.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Sharon HoCentre for Eye Health, UNSW Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1975-828X
Angelica LyCentre for Eye Health, UNSW Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Kyoko Ohno-MatsuiDepartment of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8375-6879
Michael KalloniatisCentre for Eye Health, UNSW Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Gordon S DoigCentre for Eye Health, UNSW Medicine and Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia. Gordon.Doig@EvidenceBased.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2141-7000
UNSW Sydney · AUBrien Holden Vision Institute · AUNew South Wales Department of Health · AUTokyo Medical and Dental University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectivesThe purpose of this project was to systematically review and meta-analyse studies assessing the diagnostic accuracy of optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) for myopic choroidal neovascularisation (mCNV). Fluorescein angiography (FA) was accepted as the reference standard.

methodsPUBMED and EMBASE were searched from inception to March 2021 for studies evaluating the test accuracy of OCTA and/or OCT for diagnosing mCNV. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies guideline was followed, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to frame clinical recommendations. Pooled estimates of test accuracy were obtained using a bivariate model.

resultsOf 410 studies assessed for eligibility, 3 studies were identified that compared OCTA to FA and 3 studies were identified that compared spectral domain (SD) OCT to FA. All studies had at least one major methodological flaw leading to an overall high risk of bias. On meta-analysis, the pooled sensitivity of OCTA was 0.89 (95% CI 0.78-0.94) and pooled specificity was 0.93 (95% CI 0.79-0.98). The pooled sensitivity of SD-OCT was 0.99 (95% CI 0.91-1.00). Due to uncertainty in individual studies, the pooled specificity of SD-OCT could not be estimated.

conclusionsOCTA can reliably diagnose mCNV in clinically suspected patients, however, SD-OCT may not reliably establish a positive diagnosis of mCNV. Future large, prospective studies with improvements in conduct and reporting are needed to strengthen these clinical recommendations.

Indexed as

Choroidal NeovascularizationTomography, Optical CoherenceFluorescein AngiographyHumansProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID36456704
PMCPMC9829918
OpenAlexW4310516154

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.