Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 29, 2025
Evaluation of Capillary and Other Vessel Contribution to Macular Perfusion Density Measured with Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography
Published on: February 18, 2022
Comparison of swept-source versus spectral-domain optical coherence tomography angiography for detection of macular
Anna Lentzsch1, Laura Schöllhorn1, Christel Schnorr1
1Cologne Image Reading Center, Department of Ophthalmology, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Purpose:
To compare swept-source (SS) versus spectral-domain (SD) optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) for the detection of macular neovascularization (MNV).
Methods:
In this prospective cohort study, 72 eyes of 54 patients with subretinal hyperreflective material (SHRM) and/or pigment epithelial detachment (PED) on OCT possibly corresponding to MNV in at least one eye were included. OCTA scans were acquired using two devices, the PLEX Elite 9000 SS-OCTA and the Spectralis SD-OCTA. Fluorescein angiography (FA) was used as reference. Two graders independently evaluated en face OCTA images using a preset slab as well as a manually modified slab, followed by a combination of en face and cross-sectional OCTA.
Results:
Sensitivity (specificity) for the automated slabs was 51.7% (93.0%) for SS-OCTA versus 58.6% (95.3%) for SD-OCTA. Manual modification of segmentation increased sensitivity to 79.3% for SS-OCTA but not for SD-OCTA (58.6%). The combination of en face OCTA with cross-sectional OCTA reached highest sensitivity values (SS-OCTA: 82.8%, SD-OCTA: 86.2%), and lowest number of cases with discrepancies between SS-OCTA and SD-OCTA (4.2%). Fleiss kappa as measure of concordance between FA, SS-OCTA, and SD-OCTA was 0.56 for the automated slabs, 0.60 for the manual slabs, and 0.73 (good agreement) for the combination of en face OCTA with cross-sectional OCTA. Concordance to FA was moderate for the automated slabs and good for manual slabs and combination with cross-sectional OCTA of both devices.
Conclusion:
Both devices reached comparable results regarding the detection of MNV on OCTA. Sensitivity for MNV detection and agreement between devices was best when evaluating a combination of en face and cross-sectional OCTA.
