Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Automated quantification of macular fluid in retinal diseases and their response to anti-VEGF therapy
  1. Martin Michl,
  2. Maria Fabianska,
  3. Philipp Seeböck,
  4. Amir Sadeghipour,
  5. Bilal Haj Najeeb,
  6. Hrvoje Bogunovic,
  7. Ursula Margarethe Schmidt-Erfurth,
  8. Bianca S Gerendas
  1. Department of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
  1. Correspondence to Bianca S Gerendas, Department of Ophthalmology and Optometry, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, Wien 1090, Austria; bianca.gerendas{at}meduniwien.ac.at

Abstract

Aim To objectively assess disease activity and treatment response in patients with retinal vein occlusion (RVO), neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) and centre-involved diabetic macular oedema (DME), using artificial intelligence–based fluid quantification.

Methods Posthoc analysis of 2311 patients (11 151 spectral-domain optical coherence tomography volumes) from five clinical, multicentre trials, who received a flexible antivascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy over a 12-month period. Fluid volumes were measured with a deep learning algorithm at baseline/months 1, 2, 3 and 12, for three concentric circles with diameters of 1, 3 and 6 mm (fovea, paracentral ring and pericentral ring), as well as four sectors surrounding the fovea (superior, nasal, inferior and temporal).

Results In each disease, at every timepoint, most intraretinal fluid (IRF) per square millimetre was present at the fovea, followed by the paracentral ring and pericentral ring (p<0.0001). While this was also the case for subretinal fluid (SRF) in RVO/DME (p<0.0001), patients with nAMD showed more SRF in the paracentral ring than at the fovea up to month 3 (p<0.0001). Between sectors, patients with RVO/DME showed the highest IRF volumes temporally (p<0.001/p<0.0001). In each disease, more SRF was consistently found inferiorly than superiorly (p<0.02). At month 1/12, we measured the following median reductions of initial fluid volumes. For IRF: RVO, 95.9%/97.7%; nAMD, 91.3%/92.8%; DME, 37.3%/69.9%. For SRF: RVO, 94.7%/97.5%; nAMD, 98.4%/99.8%; DME, 86.3%/97.5%.

Conclusion Fully automated localisation and quantification of IRF/SRF over time shed light on the fluid dynamics in each disease. There is a specific anatomical response of IRF/SRF to anti-VEGF therapy in all diseases studied.

  • Retina
  • Imaging
  • Macula
  • Treatment Medical
View Full Text

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Twitter Hrvoje Bogunovic @hbogunovic and OPTIMA @OPTIMALab.

  • Contributors MM: writing the manuscript, acquiring data, analyses of the results, interpretation of the data, contribution to the conception and design of the work. MF: analyses of the results, interpretation of the data and critical revision of the manuscript. PS and HB: interpretation of the data, contribution to the conception and design of the work, and critical revision of the manuscript. AS, BHN and UMS-E: interpretation of the data and critical revision of the manuscript. BSG: idea, conception and design of the work, analyses of the results, interpretation of the data and critical revision of the manuscript.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests MM, MF, PS, AS, BHN and HB: none; UMS-E: Bayer/Novartis/Böhringer-Ingelheim/Alcon (C) and BSG: Novartis (C) and IDx (F).

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

  • Data availability statement Data are available upon reasonable request. Data may be obtained from a third party and are not publicly available.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.

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.