Aim To compare detection rates of drusen and subretinal fluid by Fourier domain optical coherence tomography (FD OCT) and orange pigment by fundus autofluorescence (FAF) with ophthalmoscopy in indeterminate choroidal melanocytic lesions.
Methods In a consecutive case series of 38 patients with indeterminate choroidal melanocytic lesion that would have been categorised as a small tumour according to the size-based nomenclature used in the Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study, each eye was submitted to ophthalmoscopic examination, FD OCT and FAF. The presence of drusen, subretinal fluid and orange pigment was recorded for each lesion by a single observer at the time of initial ophthalmoscopic evaluation and on fundus photographs. FD OCT and autofluorescence images were reviewed in all cases in a masked fashion.
Results The ophthalmoscopic examination revealed drusen in 42%, subretinal fluid in 53% and orange pigment in 50% of patients. FD-OCT detected drusen in 45% and subretinal fluid in 58% of cases, and FAF detected orange pigment in 58% of cases. Based on the McNemar test, none of the differences were statistically significant at the 0.05 level.
Conclusions FD OCT and FAF complement clinical examination by verifying and documenting retinal and RPE changes associated with indeterminate choroidal melanocytic lesions. The detection rates by FD OCT and FAF of important qualitative prognostic factors appear to be equivalent to ophthalmoscopy by a trained observer. Once validated in a larger number of patients, FD OCT and FAF findings can be incorporated into diagnostic algorithms.
- diagnostic tests/investigation
Statistics from Altmetric.com
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.
Competing interests None.
Ethics approval Ethics approval was provided by the Cleveland Clinic Foundation IRB.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.