OCT-Angiography as a reliable prognostic tool in laser-treated proliferative diabetic retinopathy: The RENOCTA Study

Purpose: To quantitatively assess retinal neovascularizations (RNVs) in proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) before and after photocoagulative laser treatment (PLT) using Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography (OCT-A). Methods: Consecutive patients with PDR were examined with fluorescein angio...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of ophthalmology 2021-09, Vol.31 (5), p.2511-2519
Hauptverfasser: Lupidi, Marco, Gujar, Ramkailash, Cerquaglia, Alessio, Chablani, Jay, Fruttini, Daniela, Muzi, Alessio, Corbucci, Roberta, Fiore, Tito, Coscas, Florence, Coscas, Gabriel, Parravano, Mariacristina, Cagini, Carlo
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose: To quantitatively assess retinal neovascularizations (RNVs) in proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) before and after photocoagulative laser treatment (PLT) using Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography (OCT-A). Methods: Consecutive patients with PDR were examined with fluorescein angiography (FA) and OCT-A before and after PLT. Baseline and after-treatment FA images were quantitatively analyzed to assess both the RNVs area and leakage area. On OCT-A RNVs area, vascular perfusion density (VPD), vessel length density (VLD) and fractal dimension were computed. VPD of the full-retina OCT-A underneath the RNV was determined to evaluate potential laser-induced changes in vascular perfusion. Results: Fifteen eyes of 13 patients with PDR were enrolled. The mean area of the RNVs was 0.47 ± 0.50 mm2 in the baseline OCT-A and 0.32 ± 0.40 mm2 in the post-treatment assessment (p = 0.0002). The mean RNV VPD of RNV was 2% ± 4% in pre-treatment and 1% ± 1% for the post-treatment (p = 0.0001). The mean VLD of RNV was 7.26 ± 1.53 at baseline and 6.64 ± 1.65 in the post treatment (p = 0.0002). A significant difference in terms of mean RNVs area and VPD reduction between eyes that needed additional treatment and those that did not (~40% vs ~20%; p 
ISSN:1120-6721
1724-6016
DOI:10.1177/1120672120963451