ArticleTranslational vision science & technology2024
Comparison of Geographic Atrophy Measurements Between Blue-Light Heidelberg Standard Field and Green-Light Optos Ultrawide Field Autofluorescence.
Article in Translational vision science & technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation of Ultra-Widefield Autofluorescence Imaging as an Endpoint for Disease Progression in Choroideremia: A Comparative Study.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Comparison of Clarus, Optos, and Heidelberg Systems for Geographic Atrophy Area Measurements.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Multimodal imaging for quantifying atrophic lesions in pathologic myopia.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Assessing Agreement between Blue-Light and Green-Light Autofluorescence of Macular Hyperautofluorescent Rings in Inherited Retinal Diseases.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Blue Light and Green Light Fundus Autofluorescence, Complementary to Optical Coherence Tomography, in Age-Related Macular Degeneration Evaluation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Discrepancies Between Autofluorescence Imaging Modalities in CNGB3-Associated Achromatopsia and Correlation With Ellipsoid Zone Continuity.Translational vision science & technology · 2025Article
- Comparison of Geographic Atrophy Measurements Between Blue-Light Heidelberg Standard Field and Green-Light Optos Ultrawide Field Autofluorescence.Translational vision science & technology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study compared geographic atrophy (GA) measurements in the macula using standard 30° field and ultrawide field (UWF) fundus autofluorescence (FAF) imaging. Methods: Participants from Age-Related Eye Disease Study 2 (AREDS2) and Optos PEripheral RetinA (OPERA) studies with GA were included for comparison between standard field FAF with Heidelberg Spectralis and Optos 200Tx UWF FAF. Two time points 5 years apart were evaluated. GA area (mm2) was recorded in the macular area for both imaging types and in the peripheral field for UWF. Results: Of 102 paired images (73 subjects), the mean (SD) baseline GA area was 5.32 (6.36) mm2 with standard and 4.79 (5.87) mm2 with UWF FAF (P < 0.001). The mean difference between the two modalities was 0.52 mm2 (95% confidence interval, -2.41 to 1.37). Progression of GA in 25 eyes over 5 years showed a median annual growth rate of 1.28 mm2 (range, 0.02 to 4.7) for standard and 1.34 mm2 (range, 0.04 to 5.3) for UWF FAF (P = 0.49). Conclusions: The measurement of GA is larger on standard than on UWF FAF imaging. The observed difference may be due to image averaging and the use of blue versus green FAF. Similar GA progression with standard and UWF FAF suggests either may be used longitudinally, although not interchangeably. Further investigation is required with updated UWF technology. Translational Relevance: With the increasing adoption of UWF imaging modalities, this study suggests that Optos UWF FAF may be used longitudinally as an alternative to standard field FAF to monitor GA.
Indexed as
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.