Comparison of non-mydriatic fundus photography and optical coherence tomography with dilated fundus examination for detecting diabetic retinopathy including diabetic macular edema

Given increasing diabetes rates worldwide, better screening tools for diabetic retinopathy (DR) and macular edema (DME) are needed. The study aim was to compare reliability and predictive values between non-mydriatic fundus photography (NMFP) and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT)...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mae-Lynn Catherine Bastion, NM, Bressler, Norshamsiah Md. Din, Philip GJT, Madhaavi KM, Mohamad Yahya A, Yuhana M
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Pusat Perubatan Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia 2022
Online Access:http://journalarticle.ukm.my/19663/
http://journalarticle.ukm.my/19663/1/7_ms0475_pdf_20790.pdf
_version_ 1848814899260555264
author Mae-Lynn Catherine Bastion,
NM, Bressler
Norshamsiah Md. Din,
Philip GJT,
Madhaavi KM,
Mohamad Yahya A,
Yuhana M,
author_facet Mae-Lynn Catherine Bastion,
NM, Bressler
Norshamsiah Md. Din,
Philip GJT,
Madhaavi KM,
Mohamad Yahya A,
Yuhana M,
author_sort Mae-Lynn Catherine Bastion,
building UKM Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description Given increasing diabetes rates worldwide, better screening tools for diabetic retinopathy (DR) and macular edema (DME) are needed. The study aim was to compare reliability and predictive values between non-mydriatic fundus photography (NMFP) and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) for detection of DR and DME with dilated fundus examination (DFE). This was a non-interventional, comparative study. Diabetics underwent both NMFP and macula OCT, followed by DFE. Images were interpreted by two masked ophthalmologists. The DFE result was considered gold standard. One hundred and fifty-four eyes of 83 patients were recruited. Sensitivity of NMFP for DR was 77.3% and 80.3% for OCT. Specificity for NMFP was 81.8% and 55.7% for OCT. Area under Receiver Operating Characteristics Curve (AROC) for DR was 0.80 for NMFP and 0.68 for OCT. The sensitivity of NMFP for DME was 63.2% and 82.5% for OCT. Specificity for DME was 90.1% by NMFP and 61.5% for OCT. Positive predictive value (PPV) of NMFP and OCT for DR was 76.1% (95% CI: 63.9-85.3%) and 57.6% (46.8-67.7%), respectively. Negative predictive value (NPV) of NMFP and OCT was 82.7% (95% CI: 72.8-89.7%) and 79.0% (66.4-87.9%) respectively. Positive predictive value of NMFP and OCT for DME was 80.0% (95% CI: 67.6- 88.5%) and 57.3% (45.9-68.0%), respectively. Negative predictive value of NMFP and OCT was 79.6% (95% CI:70.3 - 86.7%) and 84.8% (95% CI:73.4 - 92.1%), respectively. Eyes with normal OCT miss 21% of DR. In conclusion, NMFP is better than OCT for DR screening, while OCT is better than NMFP and DFE for detection of DME. Both modalities should be for better DR screening.
first_indexed 2025-11-15T00:41:25Z
format Article
id oai:generic.eprints.org:19663
institution Universiti Kebangasaan Malaysia
institution_category Local University
language English
last_indexed 2025-11-15T00:41:25Z
publishDate 2022
publisher Pusat Perubatan Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling oai:generic.eprints.org:196632022-09-12T01:51:37Z http://journalarticle.ukm.my/19663/ Comparison of non-mydriatic fundus photography and optical coherence tomography with dilated fundus examination for detecting diabetic retinopathy including diabetic macular edema Mae-Lynn Catherine Bastion, NM, Bressler Norshamsiah Md. Din, Philip GJT, Madhaavi KM, Mohamad Yahya A, Yuhana M, Given increasing diabetes rates worldwide, better screening tools for diabetic retinopathy (DR) and macular edema (DME) are needed. The study aim was to compare reliability and predictive values between non-mydriatic fundus photography (NMFP) and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) for detection of DR and DME with dilated fundus examination (DFE). This was a non-interventional, comparative study. Diabetics underwent both NMFP and macula OCT, followed by DFE. Images were interpreted by two masked ophthalmologists. The DFE result was considered gold standard. One hundred and fifty-four eyes of 83 patients were recruited. Sensitivity of NMFP for DR was 77.3% and 80.3% for OCT. Specificity for NMFP was 81.8% and 55.7% for OCT. Area under Receiver Operating Characteristics Curve (AROC) for DR was 0.80 for NMFP and 0.68 for OCT. The sensitivity of NMFP for DME was 63.2% and 82.5% for OCT. Specificity for DME was 90.1% by NMFP and 61.5% for OCT. Positive predictive value (PPV) of NMFP and OCT for DR was 76.1% (95% CI: 63.9-85.3%) and 57.6% (46.8-67.7%), respectively. Negative predictive value (NPV) of NMFP and OCT was 82.7% (95% CI: 72.8-89.7%) and 79.0% (66.4-87.9%) respectively. Positive predictive value of NMFP and OCT for DME was 80.0% (95% CI: 67.6- 88.5%) and 57.3% (45.9-68.0%), respectively. Negative predictive value of NMFP and OCT was 79.6% (95% CI:70.3 - 86.7%) and 84.8% (95% CI:73.4 - 92.1%), respectively. Eyes with normal OCT miss 21% of DR. In conclusion, NMFP is better than OCT for DR screening, while OCT is better than NMFP and DFE for detection of DME. Both modalities should be for better DR screening. Pusat Perubatan Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia 2022-06 Article PeerReviewed application/pdf en http://journalarticle.ukm.my/19663/1/7_ms0475_pdf_20790.pdf Mae-Lynn Catherine Bastion, and NM, Bressler and Norshamsiah Md. Din, and Philip GJT, and Madhaavi KM, and Mohamad Yahya A, and Yuhana M, (2022) Comparison of non-mydriatic fundus photography and optical coherence tomography with dilated fundus examination for detecting diabetic retinopathy including diabetic macular edema. Medicine & Health, 17 (1). pp. 88-104. ISSN 2289-5728 https://www.medicineandhealthukm.com/toc/17/1
spellingShingle Mae-Lynn Catherine Bastion,
NM, Bressler
Norshamsiah Md. Din,
Philip GJT,
Madhaavi KM,
Mohamad Yahya A,
Yuhana M,
Comparison of non-mydriatic fundus photography and optical coherence tomography with dilated fundus examination for detecting diabetic retinopathy including diabetic macular edema
title Comparison of non-mydriatic fundus photography and optical coherence tomography with dilated fundus examination for detecting diabetic retinopathy including diabetic macular edema
title_full Comparison of non-mydriatic fundus photography and optical coherence tomography with dilated fundus examination for detecting diabetic retinopathy including diabetic macular edema
title_fullStr Comparison of non-mydriatic fundus photography and optical coherence tomography with dilated fundus examination for detecting diabetic retinopathy including diabetic macular edema
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of non-mydriatic fundus photography and optical coherence tomography with dilated fundus examination for detecting diabetic retinopathy including diabetic macular edema
title_short Comparison of non-mydriatic fundus photography and optical coherence tomography with dilated fundus examination for detecting diabetic retinopathy including diabetic macular edema
title_sort comparison of non-mydriatic fundus photography and optical coherence tomography with dilated fundus examination for detecting diabetic retinopathy including diabetic macular edema
url http://journalarticle.ukm.my/19663/
http://journalarticle.ukm.my/19663/
http://journalarticle.ukm.my/19663/1/7_ms0475_pdf_20790.pdf