Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Characterisation of reticular pseudodrusen and their central target aspect in multi-spectral, confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy

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

Abstract

Background

To analyse reticular pseudodrusen (RPD) in patients with age-related macular degeneration (AMD) using multi-spectral (MS), confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (cSLO).

Methods

cSLO images (blue fundus autofluorescence [FAF; exc., λ = 488; em., λ = 500–700 nm], near-infrared reflectance [IR; λ = 820 nm], MS [blue reflectance (BR) λ = 488 nm, green reflectance (GR) λ = 515 nm, IR λ = 820 nm], as well as colour fundus photographs (CFP) were taken of 200 eyes from 100 AMD patients suspected to show RPD on the basis of funduscopy or previous fundus imaging. FAF and IR images were graded by two independent readers. If both readers concordantly confirmed the presence of RPD in both modalities, eyes were subsequently also graded for RPD in MS, BR, GR, green-blue enhanced mode (GBE), and CFP. Besides, FAF, IR, and MS images were evaluated for the presence of a target aspect, which represents a common feature of RPD lesions.

Results

The presence of RPD was confirmed using FAF and IR images by both readers in 130 eyes of 76 patients. In those eyes, both readers concordantly diagnosed RPD in MS images in 124 (95.4 %) eyes (BR: 52 [40.0 %], GR: 63 [48.5 %], GBE: 101 [77.7 %], CF: 27 [20.8 %]). Cohen kappa statistics revealed excellent inter-observer agreement for MS (0.95) and GBE (0.85), substantial agreement for BR (0.75), GR (0.78), and moderate agreement for CFP (0.59). A target aspect within RPD lesions was detected in 45 of 130 (35.0 %) included eyes using FAF and IR. The presence of a target aspect improved the recognition of RPD lesions in all modalities. If a target aspect was present, RPD were diagnosed in 45 eyes (100 %) using MS (GBE: 42 eyes [93.3 %], BR: 30 eyes [66.7 %], GR: 37 eyes [82.2 %], CFP: 17 eyes [37.8 %]). Using MS cSLO, a target aspect could be identified in 75 of 130 (57.7 %) included eyes.

Conclusions

MS cSLO imaging is equivalent to FAF and IR in identifying RPD in AMD patients. Higher identification rates in BR and GR of those RPD lesions featuring a target aspect confirm the current hypothesis of RPD localisation and its progression further into the photoreceptor layers. MS seems to be more sensitive in identifying a central target aspect in RPD lesions compared to blue FAF and IR.

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
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Arnold JJ, Sarks SH, Killingsworth MC, Sarks JP (1995) Reticular pseudodrusen. A risk factor in age-related maculopathy. Retina 15(3):183–191

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cohen SY, Dubois L, Tadayoni R, Delahaye-Mazza C, Debibie C, Quentel G (2007) Prevalence of reticular pseudodrusen in age-related macular degeneration with newly diagnosed choroidal neovascularization. Br J Ophthalmol 91(3):354–359

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Zweifel SA, Imamura Y, Spaide TC, Fujiwara T, Spaide RF (2010) Prevalence and significance of subretinal drusenoid deposits (reticular pseudodrusen) in age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 117(9):1775–1781

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schmitz-Valckenberg S, Alten F, Steinberg JS, Jaffe GJ, Fleckenstein M, Mukesh BN, Hohman TC, Holz FG, Geographic Atrophy Progression (GAP) Study Group (2011) Reticular drusen associated with geographic atrophy in age-related macular degeneration. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 52(9):5009–5015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Curcio CA, Messinger JD, Sloan KR, McGwin G, Medeiros NE, Spaide RF (2013) Subretinal drusenoid deposits in non-neovascular age-related macular degeneration: Morphology, Prevalence, Topography, and Biogenesis Model. Retina 33(2):265–276

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sarks J, Arnold J, Ho IV, Sarks S, Killingsworth M (2011) Evolution of reticular pseudodrusen. Br J Ophthalmol 95(7):979–985

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pumariega NM, Smith RT, Sohrab MA, Letien V, Souied EH (2011) A prospective study of reticular macular disease. Ophthalmology 118(8):1619–1625

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Klein R, Meuer SM, Knudtson MD, Iyengar SK, Klein BE (2008) The epidemiology of retinal reticular drusen. Am J Ophthalmol 145(2):317–326

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ueda-Arakawa N, Ooto S, Nakata I, Yamashiro K, Tsujikawa A, Oishi A, Yoshimura N (2013) Prevalence and genomic association of reticular pseudodrusen in age-related macular degeneration. Am J Ophthalmol 155(2):260–269

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Zweifel SA, Spaide RF, Curcio CA, Malek G, Imamura Y (2010) Reticular pseudodrusen are subretinal drusenoid deposits. Ophthalmology 117(2):303–312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Smith RT, Sohrab MA, Busuioc M, Barile G (2009) Reticular macular disease. Am J Ophthalmol 148(5):733–743

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Querques G, Srour M, Massamba N, Puche N, Souied EH (2013) Reticular pseudodrusen. Ophthalmology 120(4):872

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Querques G, Querques L, Martinelli D, Massamba N, Coscas G, Soubrane G, Souied EH (2011) Pathologic insights from integrated imaging of reticular pseudodrusen in age-related macular degeneration. Retina 31(3):518–526

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Spaide RF, Curcio CA (2010) Drusen characterization with multimodal imaging. Retina 30:1441–1454

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Querques G, Canouï-Poitrine F, Coscas F, Massamba N, Querques L, Mimoun G, Bandello F, Souied EH (2012) Analysis of progression of reticular pseudodrusen by spectral domain-optical coherence tomography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 53(3):1264–1270

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Forte R, Querques G, Querques L, Massamba N, Le Tien V, Souied EH (2012) Multimodal imaging of dry age-related macular degeneration. Acta Ophthalmol 90:281–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Landa G, Rosen RB, Pilavas J, Garcia PM (2012) Drusen characteristics revealed by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography and their corresponding fundus autofluorescence appearance in dry age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmic Res 47(2):81–86

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of Interest

F. Alten, Heidelberg Engineering, Novartis; C.R. Clemens, Heidelberg Engineering, Novartis, Bayer; P. Heiduschka, Novartis; N. Eter, Heidelberg Engineering, Novartis, Bayer, Sanofi Aventis, Allergan, Bausch and Lomb

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ophthalmology, University of Muenster Medical Center, Domagkstrasse 15, 48149, Muenster, Germany

    F. Alten, C. R. Clemens, P. Heiduschka & N. Eter

Authors
  1. F. Alten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C. R. Clemens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. Heiduschka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. N. Eter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. Alten.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Alten, F., Clemens, C.R., Heiduschka, P. et al. Characterisation of reticular pseudodrusen and their central target aspect in multi-spectral, confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 252, 715–721 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-013-2525-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-013-2525-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation