TY - JOUR
T1 - Optical coherence tomography angiography analysis methods
T2 - a systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Courtie, Ella
AU - Kirkpatrick, James Robert Moore
AU - Taylor, Matthew
AU - Faes, Livia
AU - Liu, Xiaoxuan
AU - Logan, Ann
AU - Veenith, Tonny
AU - Denniston, Alastair K.
AU - Blanch, Richard J.
PY - 2024/4/26
Y1 - 2024/4/26
N2 - Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) is widely used for non-invasive retinal vascular imaging, but the OCTA methods used to assess retinal perfusion vary. We evaluated the different methods used to assess retinal perfusion between OCTA studies. MEDLINE and Embase were searched from 2014 to August 2021. We included prospective studies including ≥ 50 participants using OCTA to assess retinal perfusion in either global retinal or systemic disorders. Risk of bias was assessed using the National Institute of Health quality assessment tool for observational cohort and cross-sectional studies. Heterogeneity of data was assessed by Q statistics, Chi-square test, and I2 index. Of the 5974 studies identified, 191 studies were included in this evaluation. The selected studies employed seven OCTA devices, six macula volume dimensions, four macula subregions, nine perfusion analyses, and five vessel layer definitions, totalling 197 distinct methods of assessing macula perfusion and over 7000 possible combinations. Meta-analysis was performed on 88 studies reporting vessel density and foveal avascular zone area, showing lower retinal perfusion in patients with diabetes mellitus than in healthy controls, but with high heterogeneity. Heterogeneity was lowest and reported vascular effects strongest in superficial capillary plexus assessments. Systematic review of OCTA studies revealed massive heterogeneity in the methods employed to assess retinal perfusion, supporting calls for standardisation of methodology.
AB - Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) is widely used for non-invasive retinal vascular imaging, but the OCTA methods used to assess retinal perfusion vary. We evaluated the different methods used to assess retinal perfusion between OCTA studies. MEDLINE and Embase were searched from 2014 to August 2021. We included prospective studies including ≥ 50 participants using OCTA to assess retinal perfusion in either global retinal or systemic disorders. Risk of bias was assessed using the National Institute of Health quality assessment tool for observational cohort and cross-sectional studies. Heterogeneity of data was assessed by Q statistics, Chi-square test, and I2 index. Of the 5974 studies identified, 191 studies were included in this evaluation. The selected studies employed seven OCTA devices, six macula volume dimensions, four macula subregions, nine perfusion analyses, and five vessel layer definitions, totalling 197 distinct methods of assessing macula perfusion and over 7000 possible combinations. Meta-analysis was performed on 88 studies reporting vessel density and foveal avascular zone area, showing lower retinal perfusion in patients with diabetes mellitus than in healthy controls, but with high heterogeneity. Heterogeneity was lowest and reported vascular effects strongest in superficial capillary plexus assessments. Systematic review of OCTA studies revealed massive heterogeneity in the methods employed to assess retinal perfusion, supporting calls for standardisation of methodology.
U2 - 10.1038/s41598-024-54306-3
DO - 10.1038/s41598-024-54306-3
M3 - Review article
SN - 2045-2322
VL - 14
JO - Scientific Reports
JF - Scientific Reports
IS - 1
M1 - 9643
ER -
