Back to Journals » Eye and Brain » Volume 5 » Issue 1

Comparison of image-assisted versus traditional fundus examination

Authors Brown K, Sewell J, Trempe C, Peto T, Travison T

Received 3 September 2012

Accepted for publication 7 November 2012

Published 14 February 2013 Volume 2013:5(1) Pages 1—8


Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single anonymous peer review

Peer reviewer comments 2

Download Article [PDF] 

Kristen Brown,1,2 Jeanette M Sewell,1,2 Clement Trempe,2 Tunde Peto,3 Thomas G Travison4,5

1New England College of Optometry, 2New England Eye Institute, Boston, MA, USA; 3NIHR Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London, UK; 4Department of Medicine, 5Department of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA

Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of image-assisted fundus examination to detect retinal lesions compared with traditional fundus examination.
Methods: Subjects were imaged using a nonmydriatic ultrawide field scanning laser ophthalmoscope. After imaging, subjects underwent both a traditional and an image-assisted fundus examination, in random order. During the image-assisted method, ultrawide field scanning laser ophthalmoscopic images were reviewed in conjunction with a dilated fundus examination. Lesions detected by each method were assigned to one of three regions, ie, optic disc, posterior pole/macula, or mid-to-peripheral retina. Discrepancies between the image-assisted and the traditional examination methods were adjudicated by a retinal ophthalmologist.
Results: In total, 170 subjects (339 eyes) were recruited. Agreement between image-assisted and traditional fundus examination varied by lesion type and was excellent for staphyloma (kappa 0.76), fair for suspicious cupping (kappa 0.66), drusen in the posterior pole/macula and mid-to-peripheral retina (0.45, 0.41), retinal pigment epithelial changes in the posterior pole/macula (0.54), peripheral retinal degeneration (0.50), cobblestone (0.69), vitreoretinal interface abnormalities (0.40), and vitreous lesions (0.53). Agreement was poor for hemorrhage in the mid-to-peripheral retina (kappa 0.33), and nevi in the mid-to-peripheral retina (0.34). When the methods disagreed, the results indicated a statistically significant advantage for the image-assisted examination in detecting suspicious cupping (P = 0.04), drusen in the posterior pole/macula and mid-to-peripheral retina (P = 0.004, P < 0.001), retinal pigment epithelial changes in the posterior pole/macula (P = 0.04), nevi in the posterior pole/macula and mid-to-peripheral retina (P = 0.01, P = 0.007), peripheral retinal degeneration (P < 0.001), hemorrhage in the mid-to-peripheral retina (P = 0.01), and vitreous lesions (P < 0.001).
Conclusion: Image-assisted fundus examination may enhance detection of retinal lesions compared with traditional fundus examination alone.

Keywords: imaging, ultrawide field, image-assisted fundus examination

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]