ArticleInternational journal of retina and vitreous2024
Analysis of optical coherence tomography biomarker probability detection in central serous chorioretinopathy by using an artificial intelligence-based biomarker detector.
Article in International journal of retina and vitreous, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Utility of artificial intelligence for the diagnosis, prognosis, and management of central serous chorioretinopathy: a narrative review.International journal of retina and vitreous · 2026Review
- Serial Aqueous Humor Proteomics in Diabetic Macular Edema: Correlation of Novel Targets with Retinal Fluid Volume.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Research Progress in Artificial Intelligence for Central Serous Chorioretinopathy: A Systematic Review.Ophthalmology and therapy · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo adopt a novel artificial intelligence (AI) optical coherence tomography (OCT)-based program to identify the presence of biomarkers associated with central serous chorioretinopathy (CSC) and whether these can differentiate between acute and chronic central serous chorioretinopathy (aCSC and cCSC).
methodsMulticenter, observational study with a retrospective design enrolling treatment-naïve patients with aCSC and cCSC. The diagnosis of aCSC and cCSC was established with multimodal imaging and for the current study subsequent follow-up visits were also considered. Baseline OCTs were analyzed by an AI-based platform (Discovery® OCT Fluid and Biomarker Detector, RetinAI AG, Switzerland). This software allows to detect several different biomarkers in each single OCT scan, including subretinal fluid (SRF), intraretinal fluid (IRF), hyperreflective foci (HF) and flat irregular pigment epithelium detachment (FIPED). The presence of SRF was considered as a necessary inclusion criterion for performing biomarker analysis and OCT slabs without SRF presence were excluded from the analysis.
resultsOverall, 160 eyes of 144 patients with CSC were enrolled, out of which 100 (62.5%) eyes were diagnosed with cCSC and 60 eyes (34.5%) with aCSC. In the OCT slabs showing presence of SRF the presence of biomarkers was found to be clinically relevant (> 50%) for HF and FIPED in aCSC and cCSC. HF had an average percentage of 81% (± 20) in the cCSC group and 81% (± 15) in the aCSC group (p = 0.4295) and FIPED had a mean percentage of 88% (± 18) in cCSC vs. 89% (± 15) in the aCSC (p = 0.3197).
conclusionWe demonstrate that HF and FIPED are OCT biomarkers positively associated with CSC when present at baseline. While both HF and FIPED biomarkers could aid in CSC diagnosis, they could not distinguish between aCSC and cCSC at the first visit. AI-assisted biomarker detection shows promise for reducing invasive imaging needs, but further validation through longitudinal studies is needed.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.