INTEGRATING MACULAR OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY WITH ULTRAWIDE-FIELD IMAGING IN A DIABETIC RETINOPATHY TELEMEDICINE PROGRAM USING A SINGLE DEVICE.

PURPOSE: To determine the effect of combined macular spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) and ultrawide field retinal imaging (UWFI) within a telemedicine program. METHODS: Comparative cohort study of consecutive patients with both UWFI and SD-OCT. Ultrawide field retinal imaging and SD-OOCT were independently evaluated for diabetic macular edema (DME) and nondiabetic macular abnormality. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated with SD-OCT as the gold standard. RESULTS: Four hundred twenty-two eyes from 211 diabetic patients were evaluated. Diabetic macular edema severity by UWFI was as follows: no DME 93.4%, noncenter involved DME (nonciDME) 5.1%, ciDME 0.7%, ungradable DME 0.7%. SD-OCT was ungradable in 0.5%. Macular abnormality was identified in 34 (8.1%) eyes by UWFI and in 44 (10.4%) eyes by SD-OCT. Diabetic macular edema represented only 38.6% of referable macular abnormality identified by SD-OCT imaging. Sensitivity/specificity of UWFI compared with SD-OCT was 59%/96% for DME and 33%/99% for ciDME. Sensitivity/specificity of UWFI compared with SDOCT was 3%/98% for epiretinal membrane. CONCLUSION: Addition of SD-OCT increased the identification of macular abnormality by 29.4%. More than 58.3% of the eyes believed to have any DME on UWF imaging alone were false-positives by SD-OCT. The integration of SD-OCT with UWFI markedly increased detection and reduced false-positive assessments of DME and macular abnormality in a teleophthalmology program.

Effect of Accessible Nonmydriatic Retinal Imaging on Diabetic Retinopathy Surveillance Rates.

Purpose: To evaluate the impact on surveillance rates for diabetic retinopathy (DR) by providing nonmydriatic retinal imaging as part of comprehensive diabetes care at no cost to patients or insurers. Methods: A retrospective comparative cohort study was designed. Patients were imaged from April 1, 2016 to March 31, 2017 at a tertiary diabetes-specific academic medical center. Retinal imaging was provided without additional cost beginning October 16, 2016. Images were evaluated for DR and diabetic macular edema using standard protocol at a centralized reading center. Diabetes surveillance rates before and after no-cost imaging were compared. Results: A total of 759 and 2,080 patients respectively were imaged before and after offering no-cost retinal imaging. The difference represents a 274% increase in the number of patients screened. Furthermore, there was a 292% and 261% increase in the number of eyes with mild DR and referable DR, respectively. In the comparative 6-month period, 92 additional cases of proliferative DR were identified, estimated to prevent 6.7 cases of severe visual loss with annual cost savings of $180,230 (estimated yearly cost of severe vision loss per person: $26,900). In patients with referable DR, self-awareness was low, with no significant difference in the before and after groups (39.4% vs. 43.8%, p = 0.3725). Conclusions: Providing retinal imaging as part of comprehensive diabetes care substantially increased the number of patients identified by nearly threefold. The data suggest that the removal of out-of-pocket costs substantially increased patient surveillance rates, which may translate to improved long-term patient outcomes.

Hemorrhage and/or Microaneurysm Severity and Count in Ultrawide Field Images and Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Photography.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate detection of hemorrhage and/or microaneurysm (H/Ma) using ultrawide field (UWF) retinal imaging as compared with standard Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) 7-field photographs (ETDRS photos). DESIGN: Single-site comparative study of UWF images and ETDRS photos. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred twenty-six eyes of 69 patients with no diabetic retinopathy (DR) or mild or moderate nonproliferative DR (NPDR). METHODS: Stereoscopic 200° UWF images and stereoscopic 35mm 30° 7-field color photographs were acquired on the same visit. Images were graded for severity and distribution of H/Ma. H/Mas were counted in ETDRS fields 2 to 7 in both ETDRS photos and UWF images. H/Mas in the UWF peripheral fields were also counted. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Kappa (κ) and weighted κ statistics for agreement. Number of H/Ma within and outside ETDRS fields identified in UWF images and ETDRS photos. RESULTS: Distribution of DR severity by ETDRS photos was 24 (19.0%) no DR, 48 (38.1%) mild NPDR, and 54 (42.9%) moderate NPDR. A total of 748 of 756 fields (98.9%) were gradable for H/Mas on ETDRS photos and UWF images. Simple κ/weighted κ statistics for severity of H/Ma: all fields 0.61/0.69, field 2 0.70/0.77, field 3 0.62/0.73, field 4 0.50/0.62, field 5 0.54/0.65, field 6 0.64/0.70, and field 7 0.58/0.63 with overall exact agreement in 81.3% and within 1 step in 97.9% of fields. A greater proportion of fields was graded a more severe H/Ma level in UWF images than in the corresponding ETDRS photos (UWF: 12.7% vs. ETDRS: 6.5%). Evaluating comparable areas in UWF images and ETDRS photos (fields 2-7), a mean of 42.8 H/Mas were identified using ETDRS photos and 48.8 in UWF images (P = 0.10). An additional mean of 21.3 H/Mas (49.8% increase, P < 0.0001) were identified in the peripheral fields of the UWF images. CONCLUSIONS: There is good to excellent agreement between UWF images and ETDRS photos in determining H/Ma severity, with excellent correlation of H/Ma counts within ETDRS photo fields. UWF peripheral fields identified 49.8% more H/Ma, suggesting a more severe H/Ma in 12.7% of eyes. Given the additional lesions detected in peripheral fields and the known risks associated with H/Ma and peripheral lesions, quantification of H/Ma using UWF images may provide a more accurate representation of DR disease activity and potential greater accuracy in predicting DR progression.

Identification of Diabetic Retinopathy and Ungradable Image Rate with Ultrawide Field Imaging in a National Teleophthalmology Program.

PURPOSE: To compare diabetic retinopathy (DR) identification and ungradable image rates between nonmydriatic ultrawide field (UWF) imaging and nonmydriatic multifield fundus photography (NMFP) in a large multistate population-based DR teleophthalmology program. DESIGN: Multiple-site, nonrandomized, consecutive, cross-sectional, retrospective, uncontrolled imaging device evaluation. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-five thousand fifty-two eyes (17 526 patients) imaged using NMFP and 16 218 eyes (8109 patients) imaged using UWF imaging. METHODS: All patients undergoing Joslin Vision Network (JVN) imaging with either NMFP or UWF imaging from May 1, 2014, through August 30, 2015, within the Indian Health Service-JVN program, which serves American Indian and Alaska Native communities at 97 sites across 25 states, were evaluated. All retinal images were graded using a standardized validated protocol in a centralized reading center. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ungradable rate for DR and diabetic macular edema (DME). RESULTS: The ungradable rate per patient for DR and DME was significantly lower with UWF imaging compared with NMFP (DR, 2.8% vs. 26.9% [P < 0.0001]; DME, 3.8% vs. 26.2% [P < 0.0001]). Identification of eyes with either DR or referable DR (moderate nonproliferative DR or DME or worse) was increased using UWF imaging from 11.7% to 24.2% (P < 0.0001) and from 6.2% to 13.6% (P < 0.0001), respectively. In eyes with DR imaged with UWF imaging (n = 3926 eyes of 2402 patients), the presence of predominantly peripheral lesions suggested a more severe level of DR in 7.2% of eyes (9.6% of patients). CONCLUSIONS: In a large, widely distributed DR ocular telehealth program, as compared with NMFP, nonmydriatic UWF imaging reduced the number of ungradable eyes by 81%, increased the identification of DR nearly 2-fold, and identified peripheral lesions suggesting more severe DR in almost 10% of patients, thus demonstrating significant benefits of this imaging method for large DR teleophthalmology programs.

Operational Components of Telemedicine Programs for Diabetic Retinopathy.

Diabetic retinopathy is a leading cause of new-onset vision loss worldwide. Treatments supported by large clinical trials are effective in preserving vision, but many persons do not receive timely diagnosis and treatment of diabetic retinopathy, which is typically asymptomatic when most treatable. Telemedicine evaluation to identify diabetic retinopathy has the potential to improve access to care and improve outcomes, but incomplete implementation of published standards creates a risk to program utility and sustainability. In a prior article, we reviewed the literature regarding the impact of imaging device, number and size of retinal images, pupil dilation, type of image grader, and diagnostic accuracy on telemedicine assessment for diabetic retinopathy. This article reviews the literature regarding the impact of automated image grading, cost effectiveness, program standards, and quality assurance (QA) on telemedicine assessment of diabetic retinopathy. Telemedicine assessment of diabetic retinopathy has the potential to preserve vision, but greater attention to development and implementation of standards is needed to better realize its potential.

Clinical Components of Telemedicine Programs for Diabetic Retinopathy.

Diabetic retinopathy is a leading cause of new-onset vision loss worldwide. Treatments supported by large clinical trials are effective in preserving vision, but many persons do not receive timely diagnosis and treatment of diabetic retinopathy, which is typically asymptomatic when most treatable. Telemedicine evaluation to identify diabetic retinopathy has the potential to improve access to care, but there are no universal standards regarding camera choice or protocol for ocular telemedicine. We review the literature regarding the impact of imaging device, number and size of retinal images, pupil dilation, type of image grader, and diagnostic accuracy on telemedicine assessment for diabetic retinopathy. Telemedicine assessment of diabetic retinopathy has the potential to preserve vision, but further development of telemedicine specific technology and standardization of operations are needed to better realize its potential.

Diabetic Retinopathy Severity and Peripheral Lesions Are Associated with Nonperfusion on Ultrawide Field Angiography.

PURPOSE: To assess whether the presence of peripheral nonperfusion on ultrawide field (UWF) fluorescein angiography (FA) is associated with diabetic retinopathy (DR) severity and the presence of predominantly peripheral lesions (PPLs). DESIGN: Single-site, cross-sectional, retrospective study. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-eight eyes of 37 diabetic subjects with or without DR and no history of prior panretinal laser photocoagulation. METHODS: Both 200° UWF images and UWF FA images were acquired at the same visit. Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) templates were overlaid digitally based on disc and macula location onto stereographically projected UWF images. Images were evaluated for the presence of PPLs, defined as more than 50% of the graded lesion located outside the ETDRS field in each of the 5 extended fields. The UWF-FA images were evaluated by 2 masked, independent graders for extent of retinal nonperfusion area (NPA) and nonperfusion index (NPI; nonperfused/total gradable area). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Association of NPA and NPI with DR severity and presence of PPLs. RESULTS: Distribution of DR severity was as follows: no DR, 8.8% eyes; mild nonproliferative DR (NPDR), 17.6%; moderate NPDR, 32.4%; severe NPDR, 17.6%; proliferative DR (PDR), 19.1%; and high-risk PDR, 4.4%; with PPL present in 61.8%. There was strong intragrader (r = 0.95) and intergrader (r = 0.86) agreement for NPA. Presence of PPLs was associated with increased NPA (191.8 mm(2) vs. 306.1 mm(2); P = 0.0019) and NPI (0.25 vs. 0.43; P = 0.0003). These relationships remained significant after adjusting for DR severity and diabetes duration. In eyes without PDR (n = 52), increasing NPA and NPI was associated with worsening DR (NPA, P = 0.001; NPI, P = 0.0003). NPA and NPI were not associated with clinically significant macular edema (NPA, P = 0.99; NPI, P = 0.67), nor correlated with visual acuity (NPA, r = 0.14, P = 0.23; NPI, r = 0.24, P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Following a standardized protocol, the evaluation of UWF FA for NPA and NPI is reproducible. Both parameters are correlated highly with the presence of PPLs and DR severity. Given that the presence and extent of PPLs have been associated with increased risks of DR progression, the clinical identification of PPLs may reflect closely the extent of nonperfusion and ischemia, thus accounting for the increased risk of progression.

Peripheral Lesions Identified on Ultrawide Field Imaging Predict Increased Risk of Diabetic Retinopathy Progression over 4 Years.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether peripheral diabetic retinopathy (DR) lesions identified on ultrawide field (UWF) imaging are associated with increased DR progression. DESIGN: Prospective, longitudinal cohort. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred eyes of 100 participants previously enrolled in a comparative instrument validation study. METHODS: Baseline mydriatic 7-standard field Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) photographs and UWF images were obtained. On UWF images, DR lesions with a greater extent outside versus inside standard ETDRS fields were defined as predominantly peripheral lesions (PPLs). Follow-up ETDRS photographs were obtained 4.2±0.3 years after baseline. Baseline and follow-up DR severity were graded from ETDRS photographs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of 2-step or more progression and progression to proliferative DR (PDR) in eyes with PPLs compared with eyes without PPLs identified on UWF imaging at baseline. RESULTS: In eyes without PDR (n = 109) at baseline, 56 (51%) had at least 1 field with PPLs and 43 (39%) had DR progression. Compared with eyes without PPLs, eyes with PPLs had a 3.2-fold increased risk of 2-step or more DR progression (6 [11%] vs. 19 [34%]; P = 0.005) and a 4.7-fold increased risk for progression to PDR (3 [6%] vs. 14 [25%]; P = 0.005). These findings remained statistically significant after adjusting for gender, diabetes type, diabetes duration, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels, and baseline DR severity. Increasing extent of fields with PPLs increased the risk for 2-step or more DR progression (P = 0.004) and progression to PDR (P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Presence and increasing extent of PPLs were associated with increased risk of DR progression over 4 years, independent of baseline DR severity and HbA1c levels. Increasing extent of PPLs substantially increased the risk of DR progression and progression to PDR, especially with less severe DR at baseline. These findings demonstrate that detailed peripheral retinal evaluation provides important information that is necessary to assess completely the risk of DR progression.

Visual outcomes from pars plana vitrectomy versus combined pars plana vitrectomy, phacoemulsification, and intraocular lens implantation in patients with diabetes.

PURPOSE: To compare visual acuity outcomes and diabetic retinopathy progression after pars plana vitrectomy (PPV) versus combined pars plana vitrectomy and phacoemulsification (PPVCE) in patients with diabetes. METHODS: Retrospective review of 222 consecutive diabetic patients undergoing PPV or PPVCE. RESULTS: A total of 251 eyes of 222 patients were evaluated (PPV = 122, PPVCE = 129). Four-year follow-up was 64% (161 eyes). Overall, patients undergoing PPVCE had better preoperative visual acuity (PPVCE = 20/80, PPV = 20/160, P = 0.03). At 4-year follow-up, visual acuity improved (PPV = +22, PPVCE = +11 letters) compared with baseline in both groups. After correcting for baseline differences in visual acuity, no statistically significant difference in final visual acuity was observed (PPVCE = 20/32, PPV = 20/50, P = 0.09). Results did not differ substantially by surgical indication (vitreous hemorrhage, traction retinal detachment, epiretinal membrane, and/or diabetic macular edema). Cataract progression occurred in 64%, and cataract surgery was performed in 39% of phakic eyes undergoing PPV. Rates of diabetic retinopathy progression, vitreous hemorrhage, and retinal detachment were not statistically different. Neovascular glaucoma developed in 2 patients (2%) after PPV and 6 patients (8%) after PPVCE (P = 0.07). CONCLUSION: In diabetic patients, equivalent visual acuity improvement over 4 years was observed after PPV or PPVCE. Visual outcomes and retinopathy progression rates were not significantly different after either intervention, suggesting that PPVCE may be appropriate when indicated in patients with diabetes.

Disparities Between Teleretinal Imaging Findings and Patient-Reported Diabetic Retinopathy Status and Follow-up Eye Care Interval: A 10-Year Prospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess self-reported awareness of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and concordance of eye examination follow-up compared with findings from concurrent retinal images. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational 10-year study of 26,876 consecutive patients with diabetes who underwent retinal imaging during an endocrinology visit. Awareness and concordance were evaluated using questionnaires and retinal imaging. RESULTS: Awareness information and gradable images were available in 25,360 patients (94.3%). Severity of DR by imaging was as follows: no DR (n = 14,317; 56.5%), mild DR (n = 6,805; 26.8%), or vision-threatening DR (vtDR; n = 4,238; 16.7%). In the no, mild, and vtDR groups, 96.7%, 88.5%, and 54.9% of patients, respectively, reported being unaware of any prior DR. When DR was present, reporting no prior DR was associated with shorter diabetes duration, milder DR, last eye examination >1 year before, no dilation, no scheduled appointment, and less specialized provider (all P < 0.001). Among patients with vtDR, 41.2%, 58.1%, and 64.2% did not report being aware of any DR and follow-up was concordant with current DR severity in 66.7%, 41.3%, and 25.4% (P < 0.001) of patients when prior examination was performed by a retinal specialist, nonretinal ophthalmologist, or optometrist (P < 0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial discrepancies exist between DR presence, patient awareness, and concordance of follow-up across all DR severity levels. These discrepancies are present across all eye care provider types, with the magnitude influenced by provider type. Therefore, patient self-report should not be relied upon to reflect DR status. Modification of medical care and education models may be necessary to enhance retention of ophthalmic knowledge in patients with diabetes and ensure accurate communication between all health care providers.

Automated Machine Learning for Predicting Diabetic Retinopathy Progression From Ultra-Widefield Retinal Images.

Importance: Machine learning (ML) algorithms have the potential to identify eyes with early diabetic retinopathy (DR) at increased risk for disease progression. Objective: To create and validate automated ML models (autoML) for DR progression from ultra-widefield (UWF) retinal images. Design, Setting and Participants: Deidentified UWF images with mild or moderate nonproliferative DR (NPDR) with 3 years of longitudinal follow-up retinal imaging or evidence of progression within 3 years were used to develop automated ML models for predicting DR progression in UWF images. All images were collected from a tertiary diabetes-specific medical center retinal image dataset. Data were collected from July to September 2022. Exposure: Automated ML models were generated from baseline on-axis 200° UWF retinal images. Baseline retinal images were labeled for progression based on centralized reading center evaluation of baseline and follow-up images according to the clinical Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study severity scale. Images for model development were split 8-1-1 for training, optimization, and testing to detect 1 or more steps of DR progression. Validation was performed using a 328-image set from the same patient population not used in model development. Main Outcomes and Measures: Area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC), sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Results: A total of 1179 deidentified UWF images with mild (380 [32.2%]) or moderate (799 [67.8%]) NPDR were included. DR progression was present in half of the training set (590 of 1179 [50.0%]). The model's AUPRC was 0.717 for baseline mild NPDR and 0.863 for moderate NPDR. On the validation set for eyes with mild NPDR, sensitivity was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.57-0.83), specificity was 0.63 (95% CI, 0.57-0.69), prevalence was 0.15 (95% CI, 0.12-0.20), and accuracy was 64.3%; for eyes with moderate NPDR, sensitivity was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.70-0.87), specificity was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.66-0.76), prevalence was 0.22 (95% CI, 0.19-0.27), and accuracy was 73.8%. In the validation set, 6 of 9 eyes (75%) with mild NPDR and 35 of 41 eyes (85%) with moderate NPDR progressed 2 steps or more were identified. All 4 eyes with mild NPDR that progressed within 6 months and 1 year were identified, and 8 of 9 (89%) and 17 of 20 (85%) with moderate NPDR that progressed within 6 months and 1 year, respectively, were identified. Conclusions and Relevance: This study demonstrates the accuracy and feasibility of automated ML models for identifying DR progression developed using UWF images, especially for prediction of 2-step or greater DR progression within 1 year. Potentially, the use of ML algorithms may refine the risk of disease progression and identify those at highest short-term risk, thus reducing costs and improving vision-related outcomes.

Peripheral lesions identified by mydriatic ultrawide field imaging: distribution and potential impact on diabetic retinopathy severity.

OBJECTIVE: To assess diabetic retinopathy (DR) as determined by lesions identified using mydriatic ultrawide field imaging (DiSLO200; Optos plc, Scotland, UK) compared with Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) 7-standard field film photography. DESIGN: Prospective comparative study of DiSLO200, ETDRS 7-standard field film photographs, and dilated fundus examination (DFE). PARTICIPANTS: A total of 206 eyes of 103 diabetic patients selected to represent all levels of DR. METHODS: Subjects had DiSLO200, ETDRS 7-standard field film photographs, and DFE. Images were graded for severity and distribution of DR lesions. Discrepancies were adjudicated, and images were compared side by side. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Distribution of hemorrhage and/or microaneurysm (H/Ma), venous beading (VB), intraretinal microvascular abnormality (IRMA), and new vessels elsewhere (NVE). Kappa (κ) and weighted κ statistics for agreement. RESULTS: The distribution of DR severity by ETDRS 7-standard field film photographs was no DR 12.5%; nonproliferative DR mild 22.5%, moderate 30%, and severe/very severe 8%; and proliferative DR 27%. Diabetic retinopathy severity between DiSLO200 and ETDRS film photographs matched in 80% of eyes (weighted κ = 0.74,κ = 0.84) and was within 1 level in 94.5% of eyes. DiSLO200 and DFE matched in 58.8% of eyes (weighted κ = 0.69,κ = 0.47) and were within 1 level in 91.2% of eyes. Forty eyes (20%) had DR severity discrepancies between DiSLO200 and ETDRS film photographs. The retinal lesions causing discrepancies were H/Ma 52%, IRMA 26%, NVE 17%, and VB 4%. Approximately one-third of H/Ma, IRMA, and NVE were predominantly outside ETDRS fields. Lesions identified on DiSLO200 but not ETDRS film photographs suggested a more severe DR level in 10% of eyes. Distribution in the temporal, superotemporal, inferotemporal, superonasal, and inferonasal fields was 77%, 72%, 61%, 65%, and 59% for H/Ma, respectively (P<0.0001); 22%, 24%, 21%, 28%, and 22% for VB, respectively (P = 0.009); 52%, 40%, 29%, 47%, and 36% for IRMA, respectively (P<0.0001), and 8%, 4%, 4%, 8%, and 5% for NVE, respectively (P = 0.03). All lesions were more frequent in the temporal fields compared with the nasal fields (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: DiSLO200 images had substantial agreement with ETDRS film photographs and DFE in determining DR severity. On the basis of DiSLO200 images, significant nonuniform distribution of DR lesions was evident across the retina. The additional peripheral lesions identified by DiSLO200 in this cohort suggested a more severe assessment of DR in 10% of eyes than was suggested by the lesions within the ETDRS fields. However, the implications of peripheral lesions on DR progression within a specific ETDRS severity level over time are unknown and need to be evaluated prospectively.

Comparison of low-light nonmydriatic digital imaging with 35-mm ETDRS seven-standard field stereo color fundus photographs and clinical examination.

PURPOSE: To compare agreement between diagnosis of clinical level of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and diabetic macular edema (DME) derived from nonmydriatic fundus images using a digital camera back optimized for low-flash image capture (MegaVision) compared with standard seven-field Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) photographs and dilated clinical examination. Subject comfort and image acquisition time were also evaluated. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: In total, 126 eyes from 67 subjects with diabetes underwent Joslin Vision Network nonmydriatic retinal imaging. ETDRS photographs were obtained after pupillary dilation, and fundus examination was performed by a retina specialist. RESULTS: There was near-perfect agreement between MegaVision and ETDRS photographs (κ=0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-0.89) for clinical DR severity levels. Substantial agreement was observed with clinical examination (κ=0.71, 95% CI 0.62-0.80). For DME severity level there was near-perfect agreement with ETDRS photographs (κ=0.92, 95% CI 0.87-0.98) and moderate agreement with clinical examination (κ=0.58, 95% CI 0.46-0.71). The wider MegaVision 45° field led to identification of nonproliferative changes in areas not imaged by the 30° field of ETDRS photos. Field area unique to ETDRS photographs identified proliferative changes not visualized with MegaVision. Mean MegaVision acquisition time was 9:52 min. After imaging, 60% of subjects preferred the MegaVision lower flash settings. CONCLUSIONS: When evaluated using a rigorous protocol, images captured using a low-light digital camera compared favorably with ETDRS photography and clinical examination for grading level of DR and DME. Furthermore, these data suggest the importance of more extensive peripheral images and suggest that utilization of wide-field retinal imaging may further improve accuracy of DR assessment.

Comparison of Widefield Laser Ophthalmoscopy and ETDRS Retinal Area for Diabetic Retinopathy.

Purpose: To evaluate agreement of nonmydriatic confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (SLO; EIDON [CenterVue]) and the 7-standard field ETDRS area on ultrawide-field (UWF) SLO imaging for identification of diabetic retinopathy (DR) severity. Design: Single-site, prospective, comparative, instrument validation study. Participants: One hundred ten eyes of 55 patients with diabetes mellitus were evaluated. Methods: Each patient underwent nonmydriatic, nonsimultaneous stereoscopic imaging using the EIDON camera and 4 fields of 60° × 55° were acquired (macula centered, disc centered, temporal macula, superotemporal). Mydriatic UWF retinal images were acquired using a nonsimultaneous stereographic protocol with UWF imaging (California; Optos plc). Before grading, a standardized ETDRS 7-field image mask was applied to all UWF retinal images. Images from each device were graded independently by 2 masked graders using the ETDRS clinical DR classification. Any discrepancy in DR grading between the devices was adjudicated by a third grader. Main Outcome Measures: κ Levels of agreement, sensitivity, and specificity for DR thresholds. Results: Severity by ETDRS grading was as follows: no DR, 10.9%; mild nonproliferative DR (NPDR), 45.5%; moderate NPDR, 16.5%; severe NPDR, 11.8%; proliferative DR, 12.7%; high-risk proliferative DR, 2.7%; and ungradable, 0%. After adjudication, the level of DR identified on EIDON images agreed exactly with that of UWF ETDRS imaging in 87% of eyes (n = 96) and was within 1 step in 99.1% of eyes (n = 109) with a simple κ value of 0.8244 ± 0.0439 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.7385-0.9104) and weighted (linear) κ value of 0.9041 ± 0.0257 (95% CI, 0.8537-0.9545). Sensitivity and specificity compared with ETDRS field grading for any DR were 0.96 and 0.75, for moderate NPDR or worse were 0.96 and 0.97, and for severe NPDR or worse were 0.91 and 1.00, respectively. Conclusions: Nonmydriatic 4-field stereoscopic widefield imaging using the EIDON device was comparable with the DR severity identified within the ETDRS 7-standard field area of UWF images. Future studies will need to evaluate the applicability of this device as a clinical and research tool and the impact of different widefield coverage areas.

Association of Maximizing Visible Retinal Area by Manual Eyelid Lifting With Grading of Diabetic Retinopathy Severity and Detection of Predominantly Peripheral Lesions When Using Ultra-Widefield Imaging.

IMPORTANCE: Methods that increase visible retinal area (VRA; measured in millimeters squared) may improve identification of diabetic retinopathy (DR) lesions. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association of dilation and manual eyelid lifting (MLL) with VRA on ultra-widefield imaging (UWFI) and the association of VRA with grading of DR severity and detection of predominantly peripheral lesions (PPLs). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective, comparative case-control study at the Joslin Diabetes Center, Boston, Massachusetts. Nonmydriatic UWFI with MLL was acquired from a DR teleophthalmology program (Joslin Vision Network [JVN]). A second cohort of mydriatic UWFI was acquired at an academic retina practice (Beetham Eye Institute [BEI]) from November 6, 2017, to November 6, 2018, and with MLL thereafter until November 6, 2019. Fully automated algorithms determined VRA and hemorrhage and/or microaneurysm (HMA) counts. Predominantly peripheral lesions and HMAs were defined as present when at least 1 field had greater HMA number in the peripheral retina than within the corresponding Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study field. Participants included 3014 consecutive patients (5919 eyes) undergoing retinal imaging at JVN and BEI. EXPOSURES: Dilation and MLL performed at the time of UWFI. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Visible retinal area, DR severity, and presence of PPLs. RESULTS: Of the 3014 participants, mean (SD) age was 56.1 (14.5) years, 1302 (43.2%) were female, 2450 (81.3%) were White, and mean (SD) diabetes duration was 15.9 (11.4) years. All images from 5919 eyes with UWFI were analyzed. Mean (SD) VRA was 665.1 (167.6) mm2 for all eyes (theoretical maximal VRA, 923.9 mm2), 550.8 (240.7) mm2 for nonmydriatic JVN with MLL (1418 eyes [24.0%]), 688.1 (119.9) mm2 for mydriatic BEI images (3650 eyes [61.7%]), and 757.0 (69.7) mm2 for mydriatic and MLL BEI images (851 eyes [14.4%]). Dilation increased VRA by 25% (P < .001) and MLL increased VRA an additional 10% (P < .001). Nonmydriatic MLL increased VRA by 11.0%. With MLL, HMA counts in UWFI fields increased by 41.7% (from 4.8 to 6.8; P < .001). Visible retinal area was moderately associated with increasing PPL-HMA overall and in each cohort (all, r = 0.33; BEI, r = 0.29; JVN, r = 0.36; P < .001). In JVN images, increasing VRA was associated with more PPL-HMA (quartile 1 [Q1], 23.7%; Q2, 45.8%; Q3, 60.6%; and Q4, 69.2%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Using fully automated VRA and HMA detection algorithms, pupillary dilation and eyelid lifting were shown to substantially increase VRA and PLL-HMA detection. Given the importance of HMA and PPL for determining risk of DR progression, these findings emphasize the importance of maximizing VRA for optimal risk assessment in clinical trials and teleophthalmology programs.

Visual acuity testing using autorefraction or pinhole occluder compared with a manual protocol refraction in individuals with diabetes.

PURPOSE: To compare visual acuity (VA) scores obtained after autorefraction or using a pinhole occluder to scores obtained after refraction according to a standard clinical research protocol. DESIGN: Prospective, comparative case series. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred ten study participants (209 eyes) with diabetes mellitus and a broad range of diabetic retinopathy severity and VA. METHODS: We measured VA after autorefraction by a Topcon KR-8000 autorefractor as well as after a Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network (DRCR.net) protocol manual refraction. The order of testing was randomized and examiners were masked to the source of each refraction. A second VA measurement, utilizing an identical DRCR.net manual refraction, was made in a subset of eyes (n = 144; 69%) to establish test-retest variability for comparison purposes. All eyes underwent VA testing using a pinhole occluder. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Best corrected VA as measured by the Electronic Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Visual Acuity Test (E-ETDRS). RESULTS: In all eyes, the median E-ETDRS VA letter score (EVA) obtained after manual refraction (MR-EVA) was 69 (Snellen equivalent 20/40), ranging from 4 to 93 (20/800 to 20/16). The median MR-EVA was slightly better than the median EVA obtained after autorefraction (AR-EVA), with a median difference (AR-EVA - MR-EVA) of -1 letter (25th, 75th percentiles, -4, 2 letters). The absolute difference between AR-EVA and MR-EVA was similar to the test-retest variability of MR-EVA alone. In contrast, MR-EVA was better than EVA obtained using a pinhole occluder (PH-EVA; median PH-EVA - MR-EVA, -4 letters [-9, 0]), and had significantly less test-retest variability (P<0.001). Generally, the spherical equivalent of autorefraction was slightly more hyperopic (or less myopic) than the spherical equivalent of manual refraction (median difference, +0.25 diopters [0, +0.63]). CONCLUSIONS: Given the substantial time and effort required for training and certification of study protocol refractionists, and the similarity between AR-EVA and MR-EVA, further evaluation of autorefraction, but not pinhole occluder testing, as an alternative to the current clinical research gold standard of ETDRS protocol manual refraction in study participants with diabetic retinopathy is warranted.

Nonmydriatic retinal image review at time of endocrinology visit results in short-term HbA1c reduction in poorly controlled patients with diabetic retinopathy.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of discussing retinal findings following nonmydriatic retinal imaging during an endocrinology visit on subsequent HbA1c in poorly controlled diabetic patients with diabetic retinopathy (DR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: During a visit to an endocrinologist, patients with DR and documented HbA1c ≥ 8.0% within the preceding month were assigned to either addition of nonmydriatic imaging and discussion of retinal findings or standard endocrinology evaluation alone. Ophthalmology care was otherwise the same in both groups. Changes in HbA1c were evaluated 3 months later. RESULTS: One hundred thirteen (94%) of the original 120 subjects completed the study. The mean HbA1c change in the retinal imaging group was a decline of 1.35%, whereas the control group had a 0.26% increase. Controlling for gender, age, duration of diabetes, presence of hypertension, and use of insulin, the difference between groups was significant (p<0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: Nonmydriatic imaging and discussion of retinal findings during an endocrinologist visit may contribute, at least in the short term, to improved glycemic control in patients with DR and elevated HbA1c.

Ultrawide Field Imaging in Diabetic Retinopathy: Exploring the Role of Quantitative Metrics.

Ultrawide field imaging (UWF) has allowed the visualization of a significantly greater area of the retina than previous standard approaches. In diabetic retinopathy (DR), significantly more lesions are seen on UWF imaging compared to the seven-standard ETDRS fields. In addition, some eyes have lesions that are located predominantly in the peripheral retina that are associated with an increased risk of DR progression. The current DR severity scales are still largely based on clinically visible retinal microvascular lesions and do not incorporate retinal periphery, neuroretinal, or pathophysiologic changes. Thus, current scales are not well suited for documenting progression or regression in eyes with very early or advanced DR, nor in the setting of vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (antiVEGF). In addition, the categorical system is highly subjective, and grading is variable between different graders based on experience level and training background. Recently, there have been efforts to quantify DR lesions on UWF imaging in an attempt to generate objective metrics for classification, disease prognostication and prediction of treatment response. The purpose of this review is to examine current quantitative metrics derived from UWF fluorescein angiograms and UWF color imaging to determine their feasibility in any potential future DR classification.

Retinal Vascular Caliber Association with Nonperfusion and Diabetic Retinopathy Severity Depends on Vascular Caliber Measurement Location.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the association of retinal nonperfusion and diabetic retinopathy (DR) severity with location of vascular caliber measurement using ultrawide field (UWF) imaging. DESIGN: Retrospective image review. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with diabetes mellitus. METHODS: All images from subjects with same-day UWF fluorescein angiography (FA) and color imaging were evaluated. Predominantly peripheral lesions (PPL) and DR severity were graded from UWF color images. Nonperfusion was quantified using UWF-FA in defined retinal regions [posterior pole (PP), mid-periphery (MP), far-periphery (FP)]. Retinal vessel calibers were measured at an optic disc centered inner and outer zone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Nonperfusion index (NPI) in the PP, MP and FP. Mean arteriole and venule diameter in the inner and outer zones. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-five eyes of 193 patients (24.9% mild nonproliferative DR [NPDR], 22.8% moderate NPDR, 37.5% severe NPDR and 14.7% proliferative DR [PDR]) were reviewed. No significant associations between inner zone arteriolar diameter and retinal NPI overall or in any retinal region. In the outer zone, eyes with thinnest arteriolar calibers (quartile 1) were associated with a 1.7- to 2.4-fold nonperfusion increase across all retinal regions compared to the remaining eyes (P = 0.002 [PP] to 0.048 [FP]). In the outer zone, the percentage of eyes in the thinnest quartile of retinal arteriolar diameter increased with worsening DR severity (mild NPDR: 10% vs PDR: 31%, P = 0.007). This association was not observed when measured within the inner zone (P = 0.129). All venular caliber associations were not statistically significant when corrected for potentially confounding factors. Thinner outer zone retinal arteriolar caliber (quartile 1) was more common in eyes with PPL compared to eyes without PPL (34.1% vs 20.8%, P = 0.017) as were thicker outer venular calibers (quartile 4) (33% vs 21.3%, P = 0.036). Presence of PPL was associated with thinner outer zone arteriolar caliber (109.7 ± 26.5µm vs 123.0 ± 29.5µm, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The association of vascular caliber with nonperfusion and DR severity differs based upon the retinal location at which vascular caliber is measured. Peripheral arterial narrowing is associated with increasing nonperfusion, worsening DR severity and presence of PPL. In contrast, inner zone retinal arteriolar caliber is not associated with these findings.

Factors Affecting Predominantly Peripheral Lesion Identification and Grading.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine factors affecting predominantly peripheral lesion (PPL) grading, such as qualitative versus quantitative assessment, device type, and severity of diabetic retinopathy (DR) in ultrawide field color images (UWF-CIs). Methods: Patients with DR had UWF-CI qualitatively graded for PPL using standardized techniques and had hemorrhages/microaneurysms (H/Mas) individually annotated for quantitative PPL grading on two different ultrawide field devices. Results: Among 791 eyes of 481 patients, 38.2% had mild nonproliferative DR (NPDR), 34.7% had moderate NPDR, and 27.1% had severe NPDR to proliferative DR (PDR). The overall agreement between qualitative and quantitative PPL grading was moderate (ĸ = 0.423, P < 0.001). Agreement rates were fair in eyes with mild NPDR (ĸ = 0.336, P < 0.001) but moderate in eyes with moderate NPDR (ĸ = 0.525, P < 0.001) and severe NPDR-PDR (ĸ = 0.409, P < 0.001). Increasing thresholds for quantitative PPL determination improved agreement rates, with peak agreements at H/Ma count differences of six for mild NPDR, five for moderate NPDR, and nine for severe NPDR-PDR. Based on ultrawide field device type (California = 412 eyes vs. 200Tx = 379 eyes), agreement between qualitative and quantitative PPL grading was moderate for all DR severities in both devices (ĸ = 0.369-0.526, P < 0.001) except for mild NPDR on the 200Tx, which had poor agreement (ĸ = 0.055, P = 0.478). Conclusions: Determination of PPL varies between standard qualitative and quantitative grading and is dependent on NPDR severity, device type, and magnitude of lesion differences used for quantitative assessment. Translational Relevance: Prior UWF studies have not accounted for imaging and grading factors that affect PPL, such factors need to be reviewed when assessing thresholds for DR progression rates.