Stratus OCT image analysis with spectral-domain OCT (Topcon 3D OCT Viewer)
- Seong-Woo Kim1,
- Jaeryung Oh1,
- Kyung-Sook Yang2,
- Young Ho Kim1,
- Jin Whan Park1,
- Jay Won Rhim1,
- Kuhl Huh1
- 1Department of Ophthalmology, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- 2Department of Biostatistics, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
- Correspondence to Dr Jaeryung Oh, Department of Ophthalmology, Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 126-1 Anam-dong 5-ga, Sungbuk-gu, Seoul, 136-705, Korea;
- Accepted 24 February 2011
- Published Online First 17 March 2011
Aims To assess the accuracy of the Topcon 3D OCT Viewer in analysing Stratus OCT data.
Methods Randomly selected fast macular thickness map protocol optical coherence tomography (OCT) raw data were exported from the Stratus OCT database and imported into and analysed with the Topcon 3D OCT Viewer. The segmentation error (SE) rates and scores were compared between the two programs. Differences in the retinal thickness between the two programs were measured in both the SE (–) group and the SE (+) group.
Results 356 eyes were analysed. The SE rate and mean SE score were significantly lower with the Topcon 3D OCT Viewer than with Stratus OCT ((30.9% (110/356) vs 38.2% (136/356), p=0.011; 0.33±0.59 vs 0.48±0.96, p=0.003), respectively). In the SE (–) group, the mean of the differences between the two programs was −2.79 μm (p<0.001) in the central 1 mm zone of the nine ETDRS areas and 1.49 μm (p=0.152) for the automated centre point thickness.
Conclusions The Topcon 3D OCT Viewer analysed Stratus OCT data very well and displayed better segmentation performance. The Topcon 3D OCT Viewer program can be used interchangeably for the measurement of macular thickness, but careful interpretation by a clinician is needed.
This study was presented at the Korean Ophthalmological Society's 101st Annual Meeting, 18–19 April 2009, Daejeon, Korea.
Funding This study was supported by a grant of the Korean Health Technology R&D Project, Ministry for Health, Welfare & Family Affairs, Republic of Korea (A102024).
Competing interests None
Ethics approval Ethics approval was provided by the Institutional Review Board approval was obtained from Korea University Medical Center, Seoul, Korea.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.