Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 19, 2026
Author Spotlight: Understanding Age-Related Macular Degeneration Pathophysiology with QAF Workflow
Published on: May 26, 2023
Comparison of Short-Wavelength Reduced-Illuminance and Conventional Autofluorescence Imaging in Stargardt Macular
Rupert W Strauss1, Beatriz Muñoz2, Anamika Jha3
1Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland; Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom; University College London, Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom.
Purpose:
To compare grading results between short-wavelength reduced-illuminance and conventional autofluorescence imaging in Stargardt macular dystrophy.
Design:
Reliability study.
Methods:
setting: Moorfields Eye Hospital, London (United Kingdom).
Patients:
Eighteen patients (18 eyes) with Stargardt macular dystrophy.
Observation Procedures:
A series of 3 fundus autofluorescence images using 3 different acquisition parameters on a custom-patched device were obtained: (1) 25% laser power and total sensitivity 87; (2) 25% laser power and freely adjusted sensitivity; and (3) 100% laser power and freely adjusted total sensitivity (conventional). The total area of 2 hypoautofluorescent lesion types (definitely decreased autofluorescence and poorly demarcated questionably decreased autofluorescence) was measured.
Main Outcome Measures:
Agreement in grading between the 3 imaging methods was assessed by kappa coefficients (κ) and intraclass correlation coefficients.
Results:
The mean ± standard deviation area for images acquired with 25% laser power and freely adjusted total sensitivity was 2.04 ± 1.87 mm(2) for definitely decreased autofluorescence (n = 15) and 1.86 ± 2.14 mm(2) for poorly demarcated questionably decreased autofluorescence (n = 12). The intraclass correlation coefficient (95% confidence interval) was 0.964 (0.929, 0.999) for definitely decreased autofluorescence and 0.268 (0.000, 0.730) for poorly demarcated questionably decreased autofluorescence.
Conclusions:
Short-wavelength reduced-illuminance and conventional fundus autofluorescence imaging showed good concordance in assessing areas of definitely decreased autofluorescence. However, there was significantly higher variability between imaging modalities for assessing areas of poorly demarcated questionably decreased autofluorescence.
