Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Are optical coherence tomography and fluorescein angiography comparable for detection of macular edema in Behçet uveitis?

  • Inflammatory Disorders
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the role and agreement of spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) and fluorescein angiography (FA) for macular edema (ME) diagnosis in Behçet uveitis (BU).

Methods

Eyes with ME detected by SD-OCT and/or FA were enrolled. Type of ME by SD-OCT and grade of macular leakage (ML) by FA were investigated. Eyes were divided into three groups according to the agreement of tests. Three groups and factors that could affect the compatibility of tests were statistically analyzed.

Results

Sixty-one eyes of 61 patients were included. Both imaging methods detected ME in 42.6% of eyes (group 1). In 47.5% of eyes, ME was revealed by OCT (group 2). The remaining 9.8% of the eyes had ME, detected only by FA (group 3). Grade 2 ML by FA was more common in group 1 (p = 0.01). The grade of ML by FA was similar in groups 2 and 3. In group 2, most of the eyes showed diffuse ME by OCT (p < 0.001). Epiretinal membrane was detected more frequently in group 3 (p = 0.005). Duration and activity of uveitis were similar between groups.

Conclusion

SD-OCT was able to detect ME in 90% of the eyes with BU. Duration and activity of uveitis were not related to the compatibility of imaging methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tomkins-Netzer O, Talat L, Bar A, Lula A, Taylor SR, Joshi L, Lightman S (2014) Long-term clinical outcome and causes of vision loss in patients with uveitis. Ophthalmology 121:2387–2392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.07.007

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rothova A, Suttorp-van Schulten MS, Frits Treffers W, Kijlstra A (1996) Causes and frequency of blindness in patients with intraocular inflammatory disease. Br J Ophthalmol 80:332–336. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.80.4.332

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Durrani OM, Tehrani NN, Marr JE, Moradi P, Stavrou P, Murray PI (2004) Degree, duration, and causes of visual loss in uveitis. Br J Ophthalmol 88:1159–1162. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2003.037226

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Tugal-Tutkun I, Onal S, Altan-Yaycioglu R, Huseyin Altunbas H, Urgancioglu M (2004) Uveitis in Behçet disease: an analysis of 880 patients. Am J Ophthalmol 138:373–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2004.03.022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Khairallah M, Accorinti M, Muccioli C, Kahloun R, Kempen JH (2012) Epidemiology of Behçet disease. Ocul Immunol Inflamm 20:324–335. https://doi.org/10.3109/09273948.2012.723112

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Yang P, Fang W, Meng Q, Ren Y, Xing L, Kijlstra A (2008) Clinical features of Chinese patients with Behçet’s disease. Ophthalmology 115:312-318.e314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.04.056

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Paovic J, Paovic P, Sredovic V (2013) Behcet’s disease: systemic and ocular manifestations. Biomed Res Int 2013:247345. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/247345

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Kozak I, Morrison VL, Clark TM, Bartsch DU, Lee BR, Falkenstein I, Tammewar AM, Mojana F, Freeman WR (2008) Discrepancy between fluorescein angiography and optical coherence tomography in detection of macular disease. Retina 28:538–544. https://doi.org/10.1097/IAE.0b013e318167270b

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Johnson MW (2005) Tractional cystoid macular edema: a subtle variant of the vitreomacular traction syndrome. Am J Ophthalmol 140:184–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2005.01.033

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Shoughy SS, Kozak I (2016) Selective and complementary use of optical coherence tomography and fluorescein angiography in retinal practice. Eye Vis (Lond) 3:26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40662-016-0058-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ossewaarde-van Norel J, Camfferman LP, Rothova A (2012) Discrepancies between fluorescein angiography and optical coherence tomography in macular edema in uveitis. Am J Ophthalmol 154:233–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2012.02.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kempen JH, Sugar EA, Jaffe GJ, Acharya NR, Dunn JP, Elner SG, Lightman SL, Thorne JE, Vitale AT, Altaweel MM (2013) Fluorescein angiography versus optical coherence tomography for diagnosis of uveitic macular edema. Ophthalmology 120:1852–1859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.01.069

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ouyang Y, Keane PA, Sadda SR, Walsh AC (2010) Detection of cystoid macular edema with three-dimensional optical coherence tomography versus fluorescein angiography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 51:5213–5218. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.09-4635

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Antcliff RJ, Stanford MR, Chauhan DS, Graham EM, Spalton DJ, Shilling JS, Ffytche TJ, Marshall J (2000) Comparison between optical coherence tomography and fundus fluorescein angiography for the detection of cystoid macular edema in patients with uveitis. Ophthalmology 107:593–599. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0161-6420(99)00087-1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Yalçındağ FN, Özdal PC, Özyazgan Y, Batıoğlu F, Tugal-Tutkun I (2018) Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Uveitis in Turkey: the First National Registry Report. Ocul Immunol Inflamm 26:17–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/09273948.2016.1196714

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Disease ITftRotICfBs (2014) The International Criteria for Behçet’s disease (ICBD): a collaborative study of 27 countries on the sensitivity and specificity of the new criteria. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 28:338–347. https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.12107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Disease ISGfBs (1990) Criteria for diagnosis of Behçet’s disease. Lancet 335:1078–1080

    Google Scholar 

  18. Barteselli G, Chhablani J, Lee SN, Wang H, El Emam S, Kozak I, Cheng L, Bartsch DU, Azen S, Freeman WR (2013) Safety and efficacy of oral fluorescein angiography in detecting macular edema in comparison with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography. Retina 33:1574–1583. https://doi.org/10.1097/IAE.0b013e318285cd84

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Tran TH, de Smet MD, Bodaghi B, Fardeau C, Cassoux N, Lehoang P (2008) Uveitic macular oedema: correlation between optical coherence tomography patterns with visual acuity and fluorescein angiography. Br J Ophthalmol 92:922–927. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2007.136846

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ophthalmology, Ankara Ulucanlar Eye Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey

    Mehmet Fatih Kağan Değirmenci

  2. Department of Ophthalmology, Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey

    F. Nilüfer Yalçındağ

Authors
  1. Mehmet Fatih Kağan Değirmenci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F. Nilüfer Yalçındağ
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mehmet Fatih Kağan Değirmenci.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

This research was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Since the analysis was retrospective, a waiver of informed consent was granted. The study received approval from the Institutional Review Board of the Ankara University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Değirmenci, M.F.K., Yalçındağ, F.N. Are optical coherence tomography and fluorescein angiography comparable for detection of macular edema in Behçet uveitis?. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 261, 3275–3281 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-023-06249-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-023-06249-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation