Observational studyEye (London, England)2025
Quantifying macular atrophy in neovascular AMD using en face structural OCT imaging.
Observational study in Eye (London, England), 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.
- Baseline Optical Coherence Tomography Biomarkers Associated with the 2-Year Development of Macular Atrophy or Fibrosis in Neovascular Age-related Macular Degeneration.Ophthalmology science · 2026Article
- Review of emerging imaging findings to reveal a broader spectrum of lesions in AMD.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026Review
- Pachychoroid pigment epitheliopathy: long-term structural changes and risk factors for disease evolution.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- The progressive journey of poor-responder neovascular AMD: tracking structural evolution and visual decline over time.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
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
purposeTo assess the reliability of en face swept-source OCT (SS-OCT) imaging for quantifying macular atrophy in patients with neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and evaluate its limitations compared to green autofluorescence (GAF) imaging.
methodsThis prospective observational study included 30 patients with macular atrophy associated with neovascular AMD previously treated with anti-VEGF therapy. Multimodal imaging included GAF and en face SS-OCT. Macular atrophy was quantified as regions of hypoautofluorescence on GAF and hypertransmission defects (hyperTDs) on en face SS-OCT. Two masked graders measured atrophy size, followed by qualitative analysis of inter-modality discrepancies. Statistical comparisons were conducted using the Wilcoxon test and Spearman correlation.
resultsMean macular atrophy size was 5.96 ± 4.48 mm² on SS-OCT and 7.10 ± 5.47 mm² on GAF, with a significant difference (p < 0.001) but strong correlation (ρ = 0.998, p < 0.001). Discrepancies arose due to hyperpigmentation obscuring hyperTDs and macular haemorrhages on SS-OCT underestimations of atrophy. Additionally, fibrosis also reduced choroidal hypertransmission, complicating hyperTD detection on SS-OCT. Border delineation inconsistencies were also observed, with diminished autofluorescence on GAF not always corresponding to hyperTDs on SS-OCT.
conclusionsEn face SS-OCT is a reliable imaging modality for quantifying macular atrophy in neovascular AMD, with strong correlation to GAF measurements. However, hyperpigmentation, fibrosis, haemorrhages, and variability in border delineation introduce significant challenges. These findings underscore the need for careful interpretation of atrophy metrics and highlight the importance of addressing inter-modality discrepancies in clinical and research applications.
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.