4.4 Article

Near-infrared reflectance imaging of neovascular age-related macular degeneration

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00417-009-1148-9

关键词

Age-related maculopathy; Choroidal neovascularization; Confocal laser scanning ophthalmoscopy; Near-infrared reflectance; Fluorescein angiography

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To evaluate various types of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) by near-infrared fundus reflectance (NIR) as compared to fundus fluorescein angiography (FFA) and to test NIR for assessment of leakage due to choroidal neovascularization (CNV). Thirty-three patients with neovascular AMD (cases) and 20 age-matched patients with non-exudative AMD and healthy subjects (controls) were examined with a confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope (Heidelberg Retina Angiograph 2). NIR images of neovascular AMD were qualitatively compared to the corresponding FFA and to age-matched controls. CNV membranes and exudation areas were manually segmented on FFA and NIR and analyzed quantitatively. Of all cases included, five eyes had classic CNV, six had minimal classic lesions, 15 occult CNV's and seven eyes had retinal angiomatous proliferation (RAP). A dark halo on NIR was found in all cases and showed high correspondence to leakage on FFA (r (2) = 0.93; p < 0,0005). In classic CNV and minimal classic CNV, the classic part of the lesion on FFA revealed strong correlation to a dark core surrounded by a bright reflecting ring on NIR (r (2) = 0.88; p < 0.0005). Occult parts on FFA of minimal classic CNV and occult CNV lesions appeared as poorly demarcated, jagged areas of increased NIR. RAP was characterized by speckled NIR located at the intraretinal neovascular complex. NIR imaging in neovascular AMD revealed characteristic alterations depending on the type of CNV. These changes may reflect histological differences of the lesions. Leakage caused local darkening of NIR, presumably originating from increased light-scattering and absorbance by fluid accumulation and sub-cellular structure alterations.

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