Abstract
Purpose To assess the reliability of manual choroidal thickness measurements by comparing different posterior boundary definitions of the choroidal-scleral junction on enhanced depth imaging optical coherence tomography (EDI-OCT). Design Reliability analysis. Methods Two graders marked the choroidal-scleral junction with segmentation software using different posterior boundaries: (1) the outer border of the choroidal vessel lumen, (2) the outer border of the choroid stroma, and (3) the inner border of the sclera, to measure the vascular choroidal thickness (VCT), stromal choroidal thickness (SCT), and total choroidal thickness (TCT), respectively. Measurements were taken at 0.5-mm intervals from 1.5 mm nasal to 1.5 mm temporal to the fovea, and averaged continuously across the central 3 mm of the macula. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of reliability (CR) were compared to assess intergrader and intragrader reliability. Results Choroidal thickness measurements varied significantly with different posterior boundaries (P < .001 for all). Intergrader ICCs were greater for SCT (0.959–0.980) than for TCT (0.928–0.963) and VCT (0.750–0.869), even in eyes where choroidal-scleral junction visibility was <75%. Intergrader CRs were lower for SCT (41.40–62.31) than for TCT (61.13–74.24) or VCT (72.44–115.11). ICCs and CRs showed greater reliability for averaged VCT, SCT, or TCT measurements than at individual locations. Intragrader ICCs and CRs were comparable to intergrader values. Conclusions Choroidal thickness measurements are more reproducible when measured to the border of the choroid stroma (SCT) than the vascular lumen (VCT) or sclera (TCT).
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 104-112 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | American Journal of Ophthalmology |
| Volume | 169 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Sep 1 2016 |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Ophthalmology
Cite this
Repeatability of Choroidal Thickness Measurements on Enhanced Depth Imaging Optical Coherence Tomography Using Different Posterior Boundaries. / Vuong, Vivian S.; Moisseiev, Elad; Cunefare, David; Farsiu, Sina; Moshiri, Ala; Yiu, Glenn C.
In: American Journal of Ophthalmology, Vol. 169, 01.09.2016, p. 104-112.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Repeatability of Choroidal Thickness Measurements on Enhanced Depth Imaging Optical Coherence Tomography Using Different Posterior Boundaries
AU - Vuong, Vivian S.
AU - Moisseiev, Elad
AU - Cunefare, David
AU - Farsiu, Sina
AU - Moshiri, Ala
AU - Yiu, Glenn C
PY - 2016/9/1
Y1 - 2016/9/1
N2 - Purpose To assess the reliability of manual choroidal thickness measurements by comparing different posterior boundary definitions of the choroidal-scleral junction on enhanced depth imaging optical coherence tomography (EDI-OCT). Design Reliability analysis. Methods Two graders marked the choroidal-scleral junction with segmentation software using different posterior boundaries: (1) the outer border of the choroidal vessel lumen, (2) the outer border of the choroid stroma, and (3) the inner border of the sclera, to measure the vascular choroidal thickness (VCT), stromal choroidal thickness (SCT), and total choroidal thickness (TCT), respectively. Measurements were taken at 0.5-mm intervals from 1.5 mm nasal to 1.5 mm temporal to the fovea, and averaged continuously across the central 3 mm of the macula. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of reliability (CR) were compared to assess intergrader and intragrader reliability. Results Choroidal thickness measurements varied significantly with different posterior boundaries (P < .001 for all). Intergrader ICCs were greater for SCT (0.959–0.980) than for TCT (0.928–0.963) and VCT (0.750–0.869), even in eyes where choroidal-scleral junction visibility was <75%. Intergrader CRs were lower for SCT (41.40–62.31) than for TCT (61.13–74.24) or VCT (72.44–115.11). ICCs and CRs showed greater reliability for averaged VCT, SCT, or TCT measurements than at individual locations. Intragrader ICCs and CRs were comparable to intergrader values. Conclusions Choroidal thickness measurements are more reproducible when measured to the border of the choroid stroma (SCT) than the vascular lumen (VCT) or sclera (TCT).
AB - Purpose To assess the reliability of manual choroidal thickness measurements by comparing different posterior boundary definitions of the choroidal-scleral junction on enhanced depth imaging optical coherence tomography (EDI-OCT). Design Reliability analysis. Methods Two graders marked the choroidal-scleral junction with segmentation software using different posterior boundaries: (1) the outer border of the choroidal vessel lumen, (2) the outer border of the choroid stroma, and (3) the inner border of the sclera, to measure the vascular choroidal thickness (VCT), stromal choroidal thickness (SCT), and total choroidal thickness (TCT), respectively. Measurements were taken at 0.5-mm intervals from 1.5 mm nasal to 1.5 mm temporal to the fovea, and averaged continuously across the central 3 mm of the macula. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and coefficient of reliability (CR) were compared to assess intergrader and intragrader reliability. Results Choroidal thickness measurements varied significantly with different posterior boundaries (P < .001 for all). Intergrader ICCs were greater for SCT (0.959–0.980) than for TCT (0.928–0.963) and VCT (0.750–0.869), even in eyes where choroidal-scleral junction visibility was <75%. Intergrader CRs were lower for SCT (41.40–62.31) than for TCT (61.13–74.24) or VCT (72.44–115.11). ICCs and CRs showed greater reliability for averaged VCT, SCT, or TCT measurements than at individual locations. Intragrader ICCs and CRs were comparable to intergrader values. Conclusions Choroidal thickness measurements are more reproducible when measured to the border of the choroid stroma (SCT) than the vascular lumen (VCT) or sclera (TCT).
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84979554774&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84979554774&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ajo.2016.06.023
DO - 10.1016/j.ajo.2016.06.023
M3 - Article
VL - 169
SP - 104
EP - 112
JO - American Journal of Ophthalmology
JF - American Journal of Ophthalmology
SN - 0002-9394
ER -