Dataset Information

Evaluation of a Remote Diagnosis Imaging Model vs Dilated Eye Examination in Referable Macular Degeneration.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

In improving clinical outcomes, developing a sustainable, transformative care delivery model is important for accessible, efficient, low-cost, high-quality community-based imaging and diagnosis of retinal diseases.

Objective

To test the feasibility and accuracy of the remote diagnosis imaging model as a clinical screening tool to facilitate the identification of referable macular degeneration.

Design, setting, and participants

A nonrandomized study of 159 patients was conducted in sites with a relatively high disease prevalence (Duke University Health System endocrinology clinic and 2 Duke University Health System assisted living centers in North Carolina). All patients underwent remote diagnosis imaging, defined as color fundus photography (CFP) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) of nondilated pupils, acquired by nonexpert imagers using a retinal imaging device located at the point of service. The criterion standard examination was defined as a traditional dilated eye examination performed by retinal specialists. Deidentified remote diagnosis images were graded for interpretability and presence of referable macular degeneration, defined as any condition requiring a retinal specialist attention. Data analysis was performed from November 20, 2015, to February 10, 2019.

Main outcomes and measures

Primary outcome was feasibility of the remote retinal imaging. Secondary outcomes were operational characteristics and diagnostic and referral accuracy.

Results

Of the 159 patients included in the study, the mean (SD) age of enrolled participants was 65 (17) years, with a female to male ratio of 1.3 to 1. Most patients were white (111 [69.8%]), 44 were black patients (27.7%), approximately 1% were Asian patients and Hispanic patients, and 2 patients declined to disclose their race/ethnicity. Thirty-five eyes (22.0%) were determined to require referral to the retinal specialist by criterion standard examination. Remote diagnosis image interpretability was better when OCT was used compared with CFP (241 [96.4%] vs 164 [65.6%]). Remote diagnosis had high diagnostic accuracy in identifying referable macular degeneration: OCT and CFP both had 94% sensitivity (95% CI, 84%-98%), and OCT had specificity higher than for CFP (93% [95% CI, 87%-96% ] vs 63% [95% CI, 53%-71%]). Substantial agreement was found between the criterion standard and OCT (κ = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.76-0.91; P < .001) and between the criterion standard and CFP (κ = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.87; P < .001). The nonvalidated patient satisfaction survey revealed that 122 participants (76.7%; mean score, 4.16; 95% CI, 3.98-4.35) preferred remote imaging over the standard care examination.

Conclusions and relevance

Remote diagnosis imaging and a standard examination by a retinal specialist appeared equivalent in identifying referable macular degeneration in patients with high disease prevalence; these results may assist in delivering timely treatment and seem to warrant future research into additional metrics.

SUBMITTER: Hadziahmetovic M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6537850 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo report the natural history of untreated neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD) regarding subsequent macular atrophy.DesignProspective cohort within a randomized, controlled trial of oral micronutrient supplements.ParticipantsAge-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) participants (55-80 years) who demonstrated nAMD during follow-up (1992-2005), prior to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy.MethodsColor fundus photographs were collected at annual study visits and graded centrally for late age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Incident macular atrophy after nAMD was examined by Kaplan-Meier analysis and proportional hazards regression.Main outcome measuresIncident macular atrophy after nAMD.ResultsOf the 4757 AREDS participants, 708 eyes (627 participants) demonstrated nAMD during follow-up and were eligible. The cumulative risks of incident macular atrophy after untreated nAMD were 9.6% (standard error, 1.2%), 31.4% (standard error, 2.2%), 43.1% (standard error, 2.6%), and 61.5% (standard error, 4.3%) at 2, 5, 7, and 10 years, respectively. This corresponded to a linear risk of 6.5% per year. The cumulative risk of central involvement was 30.4% (standard error, 3.2%), 43.4% (standard error, 3.8%), and 57.0% (standard error, 4.8%) at first appearance of atrophy, 2 years, and 5 years, respectively. Geographic atrophy (GA) in the fellow eye was associated with increased risk of macular atrophy (hazard ratio [HR], 1.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.17-2.49; P = 0.006). However, higher 52-single nucleotide polymorphism AMD genetic risk score was not associated with increased risk of macular atrophy (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.90-1.17; P = 0.67). Similarly, no significant differences were observed according to SNPs at CFH, ARMS2, or C3.ConclusionsThe rate of incident macular atrophy after untreated nAMD is relatively high, increasing linearly over time and affecting half of eyes by 8 years. Hence, factors other than anti-VEGF therapy are involved in atrophy development, including natural progression to GA. Comparison with studies of treated nAMD suggests it may not be necessary to invoke a large effect of anti-VEGF therapy on inciting macular atrophy, although a contribution remains possible. Central involvement is present in one third of eyes at the outset (similar to pure GA) and increases linearly to half at 3 years.