首页> 外文期刊>International ophthalmology >Comparison of fundus autofluorescence images acquired by the confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope (488 nm excitation) and the modified Topcon fundus camera (580 nm excitation)
【24h】

Comparison of fundus autofluorescence images acquired by the confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope (488 nm excitation) and the modified Topcon fundus camera (580 nm excitation)

机译:共聚焦扫描激光检眼镜(488 nm激发)和改良的Topcon眼底相机(580 nm激发)获得的眼底自发荧光图像的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

To compare autofluorescence (AF) images obtained with the confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope (using the Heidelberg retina angiograph; HRA) and the modified Topcon fundus camera, in a routine clinical setting. A prospective comparative study conducted at the Jules-Gonin Eye Hospital. Fifty-six patients from the medical retina clinic. All patients had complete ophthalmic slit-lamp and fundus examinations, colour and red-free fundus photography, AF imaging with both instruments, and fluorescein angiography. Cataract and fixation were graded clinically. AF patterns were analyzed for healthy and pathological features. Differences of image noise were analyzed by cataract grading and fixation. A total of 105 eyes were included. AF patterns discovered by the retina angiograph and the fundus camera images, respectively, were a dark optic disc in 72 % versus 15 %, a dark fovea in 92 % versus 4 %, sub- and intraretinal fluid visible as hyperautofluorescence on HRA images only, lipid exudates visible as hypoautofluorescence on HRA images only. The same autofluorescent pattern was found on both images for geographic atrophy, retinal pigment changes, drusen and haemorrhage. Image noise was significantly associated with the degree of cataract and/or poor fixation, favouring the fundus camera. Images acquired by the fundus camera before and after fluorescein angiography were identical. Fundus AF images differ according to the technical differences of the instruments used. Knowledge of these differences is important not only for correctly interpreting images, but also for selecting the most appropriate instrument for the clinical situation.
机译:在常规临床环境中,比较使用共焦扫描激光检眼镜(使用海德堡视网膜血管造影仪; HRA)和改良型Topcon眼底照相机获得的自发荧光(AF)图像。在Jules-Gonin眼科医院进行的前瞻性比较研究。来自视网膜医疗诊所的56名患者。所有患者均进行了完整的眼科裂隙灯和眼底检查,无彩色和无红眼底照相,两种仪器的AF成像以及荧光素血管造影。白内障和注视的临床分级。分析了AF模式的健康和病理特征。通过白内障分级和固定分析图像噪声的差异。总共包括105只眼睛。分别由视网膜血管造影仪和眼底照相机图像发现的AF模式是暗视盘,分别为72%和15%,暗凹中央凹,分别为92%和4%,仅在HRA图像上可见视网膜下和视网膜内液为超自发荧光,脂质渗出仅在HRA图像上显示为低自发荧光。在两个图像上都发现了相同的自发荧光模式,用于地理萎缩,视网膜色素改变,玻璃膜疣和出血。图像噪声与白内障程度和/或注视不佳显着相关,这有利于眼底照相机。荧光素血管造影前后眼底照相机获得的图像是相同的。根据所用器械的技术差异,眼底AF图像也会有所不同。了解这些差异不仅对于正确解释图像非常重要,而且对于选择最适合临床情况的仪器也很重要。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号