Article Text

other Versions

PDF
Choroidal thickness maps from spectral domain and swept source optical coherence tomography: algorithmic versus ground truth annotation
  1. Ana-Maria Philip1,
  2. Bianca S Gerendas1,
  3. Li Zhang2,
  4. Henrik Faatz1,
  5. Dominika Podkowinski1,
  6. Hrvoje Bogunovic1,2,
  7. Michael D Abramoff2,3,
  8. Michael Hagmann4,
  9. Roland Leitner1,
  10. Christian Simader1,
  11. Milan Sonka2,
  12. Sebastian M Waldstein1,
  13. Ursula Schmidt-Erfurth1
  1. 1Christian Doppler Laboratory for Ophthalmic Image Analysis, Department of ophthalmology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  2. 2Iowa Institute for Biomedical Imaging, L300 Pappajohn Biomedical Discovery Building, Iowa City, Iowa, USA
  3. 3Stephen R Wynn Institute for Vision Research, Iowa City, Iowa, USA
  4. 4Center for Medical Statistics, Informatics, and Intelligent Systems, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  1. Correspondence to Professor Dr Ursula Schmidt-Erfurth, Department of Ophthalmology, Medical University of Vienna, Spitalgasse 23, Vienna AT-1090, Austria; ursula.schmidt-erfurth{at}meduniwien.ac.at

Abstract

Background/aims The purpose of the study was to create a standardised protocol for choroidal thickness measurements and to determine whether choroidal thickness measurements made on images obtained by spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) and swept source (SS-) OCT from patients with healthy retina are interchangeable when performed manually or with an automatic algorithm.

Methods 36 grid cell measurements for choroidal thickness for each volumetric scan were obtained, which were measured for SD-OCT and SS-OCT with two methods on 18 eyes of healthy volunteers. Manual segmentation by experienced retinal graders from the Vienna Reading Center and automated segmentation on >6300 images of the choroid from both devices were statistically compared.

Results Model-based comparison between SD-OCT/SS-OCT showed a systematic difference in choroidal thickness of 16.26±0.725 μm (p<0.001) for manual segmentation and 21.55±0.725 μm (p<0.001) for automated segmentation. Comparison of automated with manual segmentations revealed small differences in thickness of −0.68±0.513 μm (p=0.1833). The correlation coefficients for SD-OCT and SS-OCT measures within eyes were 0.975 for manual segmentation and 0.955 for automatic segmentation.

Conclusion Choroidal thickness measurements of SD-OCT and SS-OCT indicate that these two devices are interchangeable with a trend of choroidal thickness measurements being slightly thicker on SD-OCT with limited clinical relevance. Use of an automated algorithm to segment choroidal thickness was validated in healthy volunteers.

  • Choroid
  • Imaging

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Linked Articles

  • At a glance
    Keith Barton James Chodosh Jost Jonas