RESUMEN
Purpose: To compare the effectiveness of the Optos P200dTx and Zeiss Clarus 500 fundus cameras in detecting diabetic retinopathy (DR) lesions. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 243 patients with clinically diagnosed diabetes mellitus who were referred for an eye examination from two tertiary eye care centers in Chennai, India. Patients underwent DR screening based on mydriatic fundal images acquired by both fundal cameras. Fundal images from the two separate devices for each eye were compared based on accurately identified pathological retinal lesions with respect to type and location. Results: When studying lesions of the central retina, they were better identified by the Zeiss Clarus compared with the Optos P200dTx, with six out of eight being statistically significant (P < 0.05). However, lesions of the mid-peripheral retina and peripheral retina were better identified by the Optos P200dTx than the Zeiss Clarus, with three out of eight lesions and five out of eight lesions being statistically significant (P < 0.05), respectively. Based on the color and size of lesions, the Optos P200dTx had a higher chance (59.6%) of missing white lesions than did the Zeiss Clarus (17%) (P < 0.0001). Consequently, small- and medium-sized lesions were missed more by the Optos P200dTx (30.72% and 32.63%, respectively) than the Zeiss Clarus (22.3% and 19.30%, respectively). Conclusions: The capability of detecting or missing a particular DR lesion among diabetics differed between the two cameras based on effective field of view, resolution, and the retinal zone being imaged. Translational Relevance: The choice of which ultra-widefield camera to be used for screening DR can be based on the greater prevalence of central versus peripheral retinal lesions noted in the patient population seen in a clinical practice.
