...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Investigative ophthalmology & visual science >Comparison of Heidelberg Retina Tomograph II and Retinal Thickness Analyzer in the assessment of diabetic macular edema.
【24h】

Comparison of Heidelberg Retina Tomograph II and Retinal Thickness Analyzer in the assessment of diabetic macular edema.

机译：海德堡视网膜断层扫描仪II和视网膜厚度分析仪在糖尿病性黄斑水肿评估中的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

PURPOSE: To compare the within-session variability of the Macular Edema Module of the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph II (HRT II; Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany) and the Retinal Thickness Analyzer (RTA, Talia Technology Ltd., Neve-Ilan, Israel) in patients with diabetes and nondiabetic subjects and to determine the agreement of both instruments to clinical observation. METHODS: Seventeen patients with diabetic macular edema (DME) and 17 nondiabetic subjects were examined. Three scans of the posterior pole were acquired for each volunteer with both the HRT II and the RTA. The edema index and foveal average thickness were derived for a 600- micro m radius circle centered on the fovea for the HRT II and RTA scans. The coefficient of variation (COV) was calculated. Clinical examination of detectable edema was performed using stereo fundus biomicroscopy and the level of agreement between each instrument and clinical observation was determined using a zonal analysis. RESULTS: Individual COVs for the HRT II and RTA ranged from 2.3% to 24.6% (median 8.3%) and 2.1% to 46.7% (median 6.4%), respectively, in diabetic subjects and 2.0% to 37.5% (median 6.0%) and 2.3% to 14.7% (median 8.5%), respectively, in nondiabetic subjects. Clinical assessment identified edema in a total of 47 sectors in patients with DME. In comparison to clinical assessment, the HRT II gave a sensitivity of 92% and a specificity of 68% and the RTA gave a sensitivity of 57% and a specificity of 71%. CONCLUSIONS: Both instruments have good within-session repeatability. The HRT II showed better agreement with clinical assessment than the RTA. The agreement between instruments was poor.
机译：目的：比较海德堡视网膜断层扫描仪II（HRT II;海德堡工程公司，海德堡，德国）和视网膜厚度分析仪（RTA，Talia Technology Ltd.，以色列内维伊兰市）的黄斑水肿模块的术中变异性。糖尿病患者和非糖尿病患者，并确定两种仪器的临床一致性。方法：检查了17例糖尿病性黄斑水肿（DME）和17例非糖尿病患者。对于每位使用HRT II和RTA的志愿者，均进行了3次后极扫描。对于HRT II和RTA扫描，以中央凹为中心的600微米半径的圆，得出了水肿指数和中央凹平均厚度。计算变异系数（COV）。使用立体眼底生物显微镜对可检测到的水肿进行临床检查，并使用区域分析确定每种仪器与临床观察结果之间的一致性水平。结果：HRT II和RTA的个体COV在糖尿病受试者中分别为2.3％至24.6％（中位数8.3％）和2.1％至46.7％（中位数6.4％），在2.0％至37.5％（中位数6.0％）之间在非糖尿病患者中分别为2.3％至14.7％（中位数为8.5％）。临床评估发现DME患者共有47个部门出现水肿。与临床评估相比，HRT II的敏感性为92％，特异性为68％，RTA的敏感性为57％，特异性为71％。结论：这两种工具在会话中具有良好的重复性。与RTA相比，HRT II与临床评估显示出更好的一致性。文书之间的协议很差。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号