Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Ten-year incidence and assessment of safe screening intervals for diabetic retinopathy: the OPHDIAT study
  1. Chloé Chamard1,2,
  2. Vincent Daien1,2,
  3. Ali Erginay3,
  4. Jean-Francois Gautier4,
  5. Max Villain1,
  6. Ramin Tadayoni3,
  7. Isabelle Carriere2,
  8. Pascale Massin3
  1. 1 Ophthalmology, University Hospital Montpellier, Montpellier, France
  2. 2 Univ. Montpellier, Inserm, Neuropsychiatry: epidemiological and clinical research, PSNREC, Montpellier, France
  3. 3 Ophthalmology Department, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
  4. 4 Diabetology, Hopital Lariboisiere, Paris, Île-de-France, France
  1. Correspondence to Professor Vincent Daien, Ophthalmology, University Hospital Montpellier, Montpellier 34000, France; vincent.daien{at}


Background To estimate the 10-year incidence of referable diabetic retinopathy (DR) in a French population with type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). A secondary objective was the assessment of safe screening intervals in patients with diabetes without retinopathy.

Methods Observational, prospective and multicentric study between June 2004 and September 2017 based on a regional screening programme for DR in the Paris region. The incidence of referable DR in patients without retinopathy at baseline was calculated by the Turnbull survival estimator. A safe screening interval was defined as a 95% probability of remaining without referable DR.

Results Among the 25 745 participants with type 1 (n=6086) or type 2 (n=19 659) DM, the 10-year cumulative incidence of referable DR was 19.10% (95% CI 17.21% to 21.14%) and 17.03% (15.78% to 18.35%), median (IQR) follow-up=3.33 (4.24) years. The safe screening interval for patients without DR at the first examination for type 1 and 2 DM was 2.2 (95% CI 2.0 to 2.4) and 3.0 (2.9 to 3.1) years, respectively. In a subgroup of low-risk patients with type 2 DM, the safe screening interval was 4.2 (3.8 to 4.6) years.

Conclusions These data suggest that in Paris area, a 2-year, 3-year and 4-year screening interval was considered safe for type 1 DM, type 2 DM and for low-risk patients with type 2 DM, respectively, without DR at the first examination. While these data might be used to support the consideration of extending screening intervals, a randomised clinical trial would be suitable to confirm the safety for patients with DM.

  • epidemiology

Statistics from

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.


  • Contributors CC and VD: conception, conducting analysis and reporting. AE, J-FG, MV and RT: revising and reporting. IC: conducting analysis, revising and reporting. PM: database, planning, revising and reporting.

  • Funding This study was funded by Club Francophone des Spécialistes de la Rétine.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Ethics approval The present study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the French Society of Ophthalmology (IRB 00008855 Société Française d’Ophtalmologie IRB#1). Patients gave their informed consent for this study.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data availability statement Data are available upon reasonable request.

Linked Articles

  • At a glance
    Keith Barton James Chodosh Jost B Jonas