Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Screening of diabetic retinopathy: effect of field number and mydriasis on sensitivity and specificity of digital fundus photography.
Diabetes Metab. 2008 Jun; 34(3):290-3.DM

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of one- and three-field, nonmydriatic and mydriatic, and 45 degrees digital colour photography compared with mydriatic indirect ophthalmoscopy for diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening.

METHODS

A group of 79 patients (158 eyes) were included in this prospective study. Colour fundus photographs were taken with a Topcon TRC-NW6S digital camera, using four different techniques--single-field nonmydriatic; three-field nonmydriatic; single-field mydriatic; and three-field mydriatic--followed by dilated ophthalmoscopy. Two independent ophthalmologists classified blinded photographs according to the presence or absence of specific diabetic retinal findings. The sensitivity, specificity and agreement (kappa analyses) of the four methods were calculated for the presence or absence of DR and for all diabetic retinal findings.

RESULTS

The sensitivity and specificity of digital photography compared with ophthalmoscopy for detection of DR were, respectively: 77 and 99% using single-field nonmydriatic; 92 and 97% using three-field nonmydriatic; 90 and 98% using single-field mydriatic; 97 and 98% using three-field mydriatic. The degrees of agreement for the four methods were 0.82, 0.90, 0.90 and 0.95, respectively. For specific retinal findings, sensitivity was greater for detection of hard exudates, nerve fibre layer haemorrhage and venous beading, and lower for detection of microaneurysms, dot-blot haemorrhage, cotton wool spots and intraretinal microvascular anomalies.

CONCLUSION

The three-field strategy without pupil dilation represents a good compromise, with reasonable sensitivity and good comfort (short examination duration, able to drive after photography) favouring patient compliance with the screening programme.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Ophthalmology, Edouard-Herriot Hospital, 5, place d'Arsonval, 69437 Lyon cedex 03, France.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

18406188

Citation

Aptel, F, et al. "Screening of Diabetic Retinopathy: Effect of Field Number and Mydriasis On Sensitivity and Specificity of Digital Fundus Photography." Diabetes & Metabolism, vol. 34, no. 3, 2008, pp. 290-3.
Aptel F, Denis P, Rouberol F, et al. Screening of diabetic retinopathy: effect of field number and mydriasis on sensitivity and specificity of digital fundus photography. Diabetes Metab. 2008;34(3):290-3.
Aptel, F., Denis, P., Rouberol, F., & Thivolet, C. (2008). Screening of diabetic retinopathy: effect of field number and mydriasis on sensitivity and specificity of digital fundus photography. Diabetes & Metabolism, 34(3), 290-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabet.2007.12.007
Aptel F, et al. Screening of Diabetic Retinopathy: Effect of Field Number and Mydriasis On Sensitivity and Specificity of Digital Fundus Photography. Diabetes Metab. 2008;34(3):290-3. PubMed PMID: 18406188.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Screening of diabetic retinopathy: effect of field number and mydriasis on sensitivity and specificity of digital fundus photography. AU - Aptel,F, AU - Denis,P, AU - Rouberol,F, AU - Thivolet,C, Y1 - 2008/04/10/ PY - 2007/11/08/received PY - 2007/11/22/revised PY - 2007/12/05/accepted PY - 2008/4/15/pubmed PY - 2008/9/5/medline PY - 2008/4/15/entrez SP - 290 EP - 3 JF - Diabetes & metabolism JO - Diabetes Metab VL - 34 IS - 3 N2 - PURPOSE: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of one- and three-field, nonmydriatic and mydriatic, and 45 degrees digital colour photography compared with mydriatic indirect ophthalmoscopy for diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening. METHODS: A group of 79 patients (158 eyes) were included in this prospective study. Colour fundus photographs were taken with a Topcon TRC-NW6S digital camera, using four different techniques--single-field nonmydriatic; three-field nonmydriatic; single-field mydriatic; and three-field mydriatic--followed by dilated ophthalmoscopy. Two independent ophthalmologists classified blinded photographs according to the presence or absence of specific diabetic retinal findings. The sensitivity, specificity and agreement (kappa analyses) of the four methods were calculated for the presence or absence of DR and for all diabetic retinal findings. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of digital photography compared with ophthalmoscopy for detection of DR were, respectively: 77 and 99% using single-field nonmydriatic; 92 and 97% using three-field nonmydriatic; 90 and 98% using single-field mydriatic; 97 and 98% using three-field mydriatic. The degrees of agreement for the four methods were 0.82, 0.90, 0.90 and 0.95, respectively. For specific retinal findings, sensitivity was greater for detection of hard exudates, nerve fibre layer haemorrhage and venous beading, and lower for detection of microaneurysms, dot-blot haemorrhage, cotton wool spots and intraretinal microvascular anomalies. CONCLUSION: The three-field strategy without pupil dilation represents a good compromise, with reasonable sensitivity and good comfort (short examination duration, able to drive after photography) favouring patient compliance with the screening programme. SN - 1262-3636 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/18406188/Screening_of_diabetic_retinopathy:_effect_of_field_number_and_mydriasis_on_sensitivity_and_specificity_of_digital_fundus_photography_ L2 - https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1262-3636(08)00053-0 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -