Real-life comparison of the viewing angle and the image quality of two commonly used viewing systems for vitreoretinal surgery

To compare the clinical use, image quality and viewing angle of a commonly used contact wide angle viewing (WAV) system (Advanced Visual Instruments (AVI) Panoramic Imaging Systems, NY, USA) with a commonly used noncontact WAV system (Leica RUV800, Leica Microsystems, Switzerland). Images of 42 cons...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:TURKISH JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES 2020-06, Vol.50 (4), p.689-696
Hauptverfasser: Bayrakçeken, Kemal, Hondur, Ahmet Murad, Atalay, Hatice Tuba, Aribaş, Yavuz Kemal
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To compare the clinical use, image quality and viewing angle of a commonly used contact wide angle viewing (WAV) system (Advanced Visual Instruments (AVI) Panoramic Imaging Systems, NY, USA) with a commonly used noncontact WAV system (Leica RUV800, Leica Microsystems, Switzerland). Images of 42 consecutively operated eyes were obtained with both systems at the same surgical stages and were compared for image quality using the Imatest Master 4.5.13 (Imatest LLC, Boulder, USA) software. The viewing angles of the images were calculated using the optic disc sizes measured from the OCT and infrared fundus images. The 68-degree AVI lens was compared with the 90-dioptre (D) Leica RUV800 lens, while the 130-degree AVI lens was compared with the 132-D Leica RUV800 lens. The surgical assistants were asked to grade the difficulty of holding the lens in place from 1 to 10, 1 being the easiest and 10 being the most difficult. The contact system provided wider viewing angles with higher quality compared to the noncontact system both under fluid and air media. The difference was clinically significant in eyes with impaired corneal clarity, very high myopia, or small pupil. The difficulty of holding the lens in place ranged from 4 to 7, and decreased gradually with practice. Both WAV systems provided high image quality and adequate viewing angles in most cases. However, the contact system appeared to provide a superior image quality and/or a wider viewing angle in more challenging situations. The difficulty of holding the contact lens in place was found to be moderate.
ISSN:1303-6165
1300-0144
1303-6165
DOI:10.3906/sag-1910-11