Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Letters
Standardised disturbance of the optical coherence tomography signal has varying effects on the scan quality assessment when comparing four devices
  1. Pauline H B Kok1,
  2. Hille W van Dijk1,
  3. Marilette Stehouwer1,
  4. Thomas J T P van den Berg2,
  5. R O Schlingemann1,
  6. Frank D Verbraak1,3
  1. 1 Department of Ophthalmology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  2. 2 Netherlands Institute for Neuroscience, Royal Academy of the Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  3. 3 Biomedical Engineering and Physics, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to Pauline H B Kok, Department of Ophthalmology, Room: D2-420, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam 1105 AZ, The Netherlands; p.h.kok{at}amc.nl

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Introduction

Optical coherence tomography (OCT) has become a successful application in ophthalmology. Time-domain OCT (Stratus, Carl Zeiss Meditec) has been overtaken by spectral-domain OCT (SDOCT) which has major advances in imaging speed, sensitivity and image resolution.1 ,2 Several SDOCT devices are commercially available.

In this small study, we assessed the change in subjective image quality and image quality parameter (IQP) provided by four different SDOCT devices using artificial filters simulating optical eye media disturbances.

Methods

In four healthy subjects, single non-averaged B-scans of the macula were acquired using four commercially available SDOCT systems:

  1. 3D OCT-1000 MarkII (Topcon Medical Systems, Inc, Oakland, New Jersey, USA): Software V.3.21, 27.000 A-scans per second, superluminescent diode 840 nm light source, 5–6 micron axial resolution, ‘Q-factor’ IQP scale 0–100.

  2. Cirrus HD-OCT (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, California, USA): Software V.2.0, 27.000 A-scans per second, superluminescent diode 840 nm light source, 5 micron axial resolution, ‘Signal Strength’ IQP scale 0–10.

  3. RTVue OCT (Optovue, Inc, Fremont, California, …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Contributors PK: first draft, substantial contribution to conception and design, acquisition of data and analysis and interpretation of the data. HD and MS: substantial contributions to acquisition of data. TB: substantial contributions to conception and design and revising the article critically for important intellectual content; technical supervisor as physicist. RS: revising the article critically for important intellectual content; supervisor as medical retina specialist. FD: substantial contributions to conception and design and final approval of the version to be published.

  • Competing interests None.

  • Ethics approval Ethics committee of the Academic Medical Center in Amsterdam.

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

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.