ArticleInvestigative ophthalmology & visual science2025
Quantifications of Outer Retinal Bands in Geographic Atrophy by Comparing Superior Axial Resolution and Conventional OCT.
Article in Investigative ophthalmology & visual science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Outer retinal band segmentation in healthy subjects: comparative study between human grading and deep convolutional neural networks.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Comparison of choroidal hypertransmission and retinal pigment epithelium loss for quantification of geographic atrophy across commonly used SD-OCT devices.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- CLEAR report 1: a scoping review and meta-analysis for definitions, imaging metrics, and functional correlates of photoreceptor integrity in AMD.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Patient-level forecasting of geographic atrophy with a biologically grounded Gompertz model.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Novel treatments for geographic atrophy (GA) require precise monitoring, which can be improved with advances in optical coherence tomography (OCT) technology. The purpose of this study was to investigate the benefits of a novel device with superior axial resolution. Methods: Patients were recruited at the Department of Ophthalmology and Optometry at the Medical University of Vienna. Patients with GA were imaged with a Heidelberg SPECTRALIS HRA+OCT and the novel Heidelberg High-Res OCT device. Outer retinal bands and subretinal drusenoid deposits (SDDs) were segmented in 49 B-scans per OCT. Thickness and loss of outer retinal bands, as well as SDD volumes, were compared between devices and regions using linear mixed-effects models. Results: The study included 3920 B-scans of 40 eyes of 32 patients. For the High-Res OCT, the myoid zone was thinner (19.85 µm, 95% confidence interval [CI] 16.8-22.8 vs. 21.37 µm, 95% CI 18.4-24.4; P < 0.001), whereas the ellipsoid zone (EZ) band was thicker (28.35 µm; 95% CI 22.7-24.0 vs. 27.29 µm, 95% CI 21.6-33.0). Smaller EZ- and external limiting membrane loss areas (all P < 0.001) were found for the High-Res OCT. The RPE band was thinner for the High-Res OCT (15.97 µm, 95% CI 13.5-18.4 vs. 21.08 µm, 95% CI 18.6-23.5; P < 0.001) without significant differences in RPE loss. Higher SDD volumes were found for the High-Res OCT (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Precise in vivo quantification of OCT features is of great relevance for individualized patient management. The High-Res OCT device allows for detailed topographical analysis of outer retinal changes in GA, which could improve early detection, patient selection, and patient management in clinical practice.
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.