4.4 Article

OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY ANGIOGRAPHY OF TYPE 3 NEOVASCULARIZATION SECONDARY TO AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000000835

关键词

age-related macular degeneration; angiography; optical coherence tomography angiography

资金

  1. Macular Foundation, Inc, New York, NY
  2. Carl Zeiss Meditech
  3. Massachusetts Lions Clubs
  4. Optovue
  5. Allergan
  6. Carl Zeiss Meditec
  7. Genentech
  8. Optos
  9. Regeneron

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To characterize the vascular structure of Type 3 neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration using optical coherence tomography angiography. Methods: Optical coherence tomography angiography cube scans (3 mm x 3 mm) were acquired in 29 eyes of 24 patients with Type 3 lesions secondary to age-related macular degeneration using the RTVue XR Avanti with AngioVue, Split-spectrum amplitude-decorrelation, and motion correction technology. Automated layer segmentation boundaries were adjusted to best visualize the neovascular complex on en face projection images. Results: A distinct neovascular complex could be identified in 10 (34%) eyes, all of which were active on optical coherence tomography imaging. In all 10 eyes, the neovascular complex appeared as a small tuft of bright, high-flow tiny vessels with curvilinear morphology located in the outer retinal layers with a feeder vessel communicating with the inner retinal circulation (i.e., deep retinal capillary plexus). The mean (SD) size of the neovascular complex measured 0.07 ( 0.07) mm(2). Conclusion: With optical coherence tomography angiography, it is possible to identify small intraretinal neovascular complexes communicating with the deep retinal capillary plexus in eyes with Type 3 neovascularization secondary to age-related macular degeneration. Qualitative and quantitative analyses of Type 3 neovascular complexes can be performed using optical coherence tomography angiography.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据