ArticleJournal of optometry
Validity of optical coherence tomography angiography in the differential diagnosis of papilledema and pseudopapilledema.
Article in Journal of optometry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess the value of optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) peripapillary retinal vascularization in differentiating papilledema from pseudopapilledema.
methodsA cross-sectional study, prospective recruitment patients diagnosed with papilledema and pseudopapilledema between January 2021 and December 2022. Papilledema: mild-moderate acute optic disc edema due to increased intracranial pressure. Pseudopapilledema: optic nerve drusen and other causes confirmed by multimodal imaging techniques. Mean and sectoral peripapillary flux index and perfusion density were measured using commercial software. Diagnostic performance was analyzed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).
resultsSixty-five patients (mean age, 36.5 years; 63.1% women) were included: 14 with papilledema (28 eyes; mean age 37.1 years, 9 women) and 51 with pseudopapilledema (95 eyes, mean age 36.4 years, 32 women), with no significant differences in age or gender. Significant differences were found for flux index in the nasal sector (p = 0.034). Mean perfusion density was significantly higher for papilledema (44.377%) than for pseudopapilledema (42.460%) (p = 0.036), as was perfusion in the nasal sector (p = 0.005). Mean vascular flux index had an AUC of 0.683 (95% CI, 0.518-0.848), with 76.9% sensitivity and 58.8% specificity, with a cut-off of 0.461. Mean perfusion had an AUC of 0.665 (95% CI 0.492-0.838), with 53.8% sensitivity and 76.5% specificity, with a cut-off of 44.25%.
conclusionsOCTA displayed higher peripapillary flux index and perfusion in papilledema than pseudopapilledema in the nasal region. These parameters showed moderate diagnostic accuracy and may serve as adjunctive tools in the differential diagnosis of optic disc swelling.
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.