Standardisation of optical coherence tomography angiography nomenclature in uveitis: first survey results.

Pichi, Francesco; Salas, Ester Carreño; De Smet, Mard; Gupta, Vishali; Zierhut, Manfred; Munk, Marion R. (2021). Standardisation of optical coherence tomography angiography nomenclature in uveitis: first survey results. The British journal of ophthalmology, 105(7), pp. 941-947. 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2020-316881

Text bjophthalmol-2020-316881.full.pdf - Published Version Restricted to registered users only Available under License Publisher holds Copyright. Download (604kB)

AIM

To standardise the nomenclature for reporting optical coherence angiography (OCT-A) findings in the field of uveitis.

METHODS

Members of the International Uveitis Study Group, of the American Uveitis Society and of the Sociedad Panamericana de Infermedades Oculares that choose to participate responded to an online questionnaire about their preferred terminology when reporting on OCT-A findings in uveitis. The response of individuals with several publications on OCT-A (experts) was compared with uveitis specialists (users) who have less than five publications on the field of uveitis and OCT-A.

RESULTS

A total of 108 uveitis specialists who participated in the survey were included in the analysis. Of those, 23 were considered OCT-A 'experts'. There was an agreement in both groups for the definition of wide-field (WF)-OCT-A, and definition of neovascularisation in uveitis. Moreover, there was a difference in the responses in other areas, such as quantification of ischaemia, definition of 'large' areas of ischaemia or terms to describe decreased OCT-A signal from different causes. There was an unanimous need of 'users' and 'experts' to distinguish size of decreased OCT-A signal in uveitis, to implement a quantitative measurement of decreased flow specifically for WF-OCT-A and to use different terms for different causes of decreased OCT-A signal.

CONCLUSIONS

While there was considerable agreement in the terminology used by all uveitis experts, significant differences in terminology were noted between 'users' and 'experts'. These differences indicate the need for standardisation of nomenclature among all uveitis specialists both for the purpose of reporting and in clinical use.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

3 since deposited on 03 Aug 2020
0 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item