FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2022963359> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2022963359 endingPage "1859" @default.
• W2022963359 startingPage "1852" @default.
• W2022963359 abstract "Objective To evaluate agreement between fluorescein angiography (FA) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) results for diagnosis of macular edema in patients with uveitis. Design Multicenter cross-sectional study. Participants Four hundred seventy-nine eyes with uveitis from 255 patients. Methods The macular status of dilated eyes with intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, or panuveitis was assessed via Stratus-3 OCT and FA. To evaluate agreement between the diagnostic approaches, κ statistics were used. Main Outcome Measures Macular thickening (MT; center point thickness, ≥240 μm per reading center grading of OCT images) and macular leakage (ML; central subfield fluorescein leakage, ≥0.44 disc areas per reading center grading of FA images), and agreement between these outcomes in diagnosing macular edema. Results Optical coherence tomography (90.4%) more frequently returned usable information regarding macular edema than FA (77%) or biomicroscopy (76%). Agreement in diagnosis of MT and ML (κ = 0.44) was moderate. Macular leakage was present in 40% of cases free of MT, whereas MT was present in 34% of cases without ML. Biomicroscopic evaluation for macular edema failed to detect 40% and 45% of cases of MT and ML, respectively, and diagnosed 17% and 17% of cases with macular edema that did not have MT or ML, respectively; these results may underestimate biomicroscopic errors (ophthalmologists were not explicitly masked to OCT and FA results). Among eyes free of ML, phakic eyes without cataract rarely (4%) had MT. No factors were found that effectively ruled out ML when MT was absent. Conclusions Optical coherence tomography and FA offered only moderate agreement regarding macular edema status in uveitis cases, probably because what they measure (MT and ML) are related but nonidentical macular pathologic characteristics. Given its lower cost, greater safety, and greater likelihood of obtaining usable information, OCT may be the best initial test for evaluation of suspected macular edema. However, given that ML cannot be ruled out if MT is absent and vice versa, obtaining the second test after negative results on the first seems justified when detection of ML or MT would alter management. Given that biomicroscopic evaluation for macular edema erred frequently, ancillary testing for macular edema seems indicated when knowledge of ML or MT status would affect management. Financial Disclosure(s) Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references. To evaluate agreement between fluorescein angiography (FA) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) results for diagnosis of macular edema in patients with uveitis. Multicenter cross-sectional study. Four hundred seventy-nine eyes with uveitis from 255 patients. The macular status of dilated eyes with intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, or panuveitis was assessed via Stratus-3 OCT and FA. To evaluate agreement between the diagnostic approaches, κ statistics were used. Macular thickening (MT; center point thickness, ≥240 μm per reading center grading of OCT images) and macular leakage (ML; central subfield fluorescein leakage, ≥0.44 disc areas per reading center grading of FA images), and agreement between these outcomes in diagnosing macular edema. Optical coherence tomography (90.4%) more frequently returned usable information regarding macular edema than FA (77%) or biomicroscopy (76%). Agreement in diagnosis of MT and ML (κ = 0.44) was moderate. Macular leakage was present in 40% of cases free of MT, whereas MT was present in 34% of cases without ML. Biomicroscopic evaluation for macular edema failed to detect 40% and 45% of cases of MT and ML, respectively, and diagnosed 17% and 17% of cases with macular edema that did not have MT or ML, respectively; these results may underestimate biomicroscopic errors (ophthalmologists were not explicitly masked to OCT and FA results). Among eyes free of ML, phakic eyes without cataract rarely (4%) had MT. No factors were found that effectively ruled out ML when MT was absent. Optical coherence tomography and FA offered only moderate agreement regarding macular edema status in uveitis cases, probably because what they measure (MT and ML) are related but nonidentical macular pathologic characteristics. Given its lower cost, greater safety, and greater likelihood of obtaining usable information, OCT may be the best initial test for evaluation of suspected macular edema. However, given that ML cannot be ruled out if MT is absent and vice versa, obtaining the second test after negative results on the first seems justified when detection of ML or MT would alter management. Given that biomicroscopic evaluation for macular edema erred frequently, ancillary testing for macular edema seems indicated when knowledge of ML or MT status would affect management." @default.
• W2022963359 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2022963359 creator A5004953489 @default.
• W2022963359 creator A5006274430 @default.
• W2022963359 creator A5007874257 @default.
• W2022963359 creator A5037098186 @default.
• W2022963359 creator A5044270602 @default.
• W2022963359 creator A5049627780 @default.
• W2022963359 creator A5049898786 @default.
• W2022963359 creator A5062196360 @default.
• W2022963359 creator A5090864408 @default.
• W2022963359 creator A5091117608 @default.
• W2022963359 date "2013-09-01" @default.
• W2022963359 modified "2023-10-11" @default.
• W2022963359 title "Fluorescein Angiography versus Optical Coherence Tomography for Diagnosis of Uveitic Macular Edema" @default.
• W2022963359 cites W1567760664 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W1979534828 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W1980847868 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W2020281235 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W2025324722 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W2037269612 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W2047901258 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W2050657932 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W2058660748 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W2059141867 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W2059688525 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W2064043899 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W2115223042 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W2135298947 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W2139499737 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W2152646072 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W2158769384 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W2164777277 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W2169144624 @default.
• W2022963359 cites W34961135 @default.
• W2022963359 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2013.01.069" @default.
• W2022963359 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/3758459" @default.
• W2022963359 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23706700" @default.
• W2022963359 hasPublicationYear "2013" @default.
• W2022963359 type Work @default.
• W2022963359 sameAs 2022963359 @default.
• W2022963359 citedByCount "66" @default.
• W2022963359 countsByYear W20229633592013 @default.
• W2022963359 countsByYear W20229633592014 @default.
• W2022963359 countsByYear W20229633592015 @default.
• W2022963359 countsByYear W20229633592016 @default.
• W2022963359 countsByYear W20229633592017 @default.
• W2022963359 countsByYear W20229633592018 @default.
• W2022963359 countsByYear W20229633592019 @default.
• W2022963359 countsByYear W20229633592020 @default.
• W2022963359 countsByYear W20229633592021 @default.
• W2022963359 countsByYear W20229633592022 @default.
• W2022963359 countsByYear W20229633592023 @default.
• W2022963359 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2022963359 hasAuthorship W2022963359A5004953489 @default.
• W2022963359 hasAuthorship W2022963359A5006274430 @default.
• W2022963359 hasAuthorship W2022963359A5007874257 @default.
• W2022963359 hasAuthorship W2022963359A5037098186 @default.
• W2022963359 hasAuthorship W2022963359A5044270602 @default.
• W2022963359 hasAuthorship W2022963359A5049627780 @default.
• W2022963359 hasAuthorship W2022963359A5049898786 @default.
• W2022963359 hasAuthorship W2022963359A5062196360 @default.
• W2022963359 hasAuthorship W2022963359A5090864408 @default.
• W2022963359 hasAuthorship W2022963359A5091117608 @default.
• W2022963359 hasBestOaLocation W20229633592 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConcept C118487528 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConcept C147176958 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConcept C2776194053 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConcept C2777286243 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConcept C2778257484 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConcept C2778818243 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConcept C2780248432 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConcept C2780347916 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConcept C2780886150 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConceptScore W2022963359C118487528 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConceptScore W2022963359C127413603 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConceptScore W2022963359C141071460 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConceptScore W2022963359C147176958 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConceptScore W2022963359C2776194053 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConceptScore W2022963359C2777286243 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConceptScore W2022963359C2778257484 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConceptScore W2022963359C2778818243 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConceptScore W2022963359C2780248432 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConceptScore W2022963359C2780347916 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConceptScore W2022963359C2780886150 @default.
• W2022963359 hasConceptScore W2022963359C71924100 @default.
• W2022963359 hasIssue "9" @default.
• W2022963359 hasLocation W20229633591 @default.
• W2022963359 hasLocation W20229633592 @default.
• W2022963359 hasLocation W20229633593 @default.
• W2022963359 hasLocation W20229633594 @default.
• W2022963359 hasLocation W20229633595 @default.
• W2022963359 hasOpenAccess W2022963359 @default.
• W2022963359 hasPrimaryLocation W20229633591 @default.
• W2022963359 hasRelatedWork W1000914229 @default.

• next