Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 19, 2025
Quantification of Vascular Parameters in Whole Mount Retinas of Mice with Non-Proliferative and Proliferative Retinopathies
Published on: March 12, 2022
Comparison of Static Retinal Vessel Caliber Measurements by Different Commercially Available Platforms
Significance:
Commercially available platforms show good agreement in clinical outcomes for retinal vessel caliber measurements, despite differing absolute values. Tighter agreement is observed when right and left eye data are averaged, suggesting an approach suitable for clinical practice.
Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to compare the retinal vessel caliber measurements generated by different commercially available platforms and their associations with systemic blood pressure and age.
Methods:
A total of 209 participants were recruited from a UK optometric practice. After a routine eye examination, participants had disc-centered retinal photographs and systemic blood pressure taken. Retinal vessel calibers (central retinal artery equivalent, central retinal vein equivalent, and arteriovenous ratio) were calculated using both MONA REVA and VesselMap.
Results:
An inverse Pearson correlation was observed between central retinal artery equivalent and mean arterial blood pressure on both platforms (r = -0.275 [P ≤ .001] and r = -0.388 [P ≤ .001] for MONA REVA and VesselMap, respectively); this correlation was also observed with arteriovenous ratio and blood pressure. An inverse correlation was observed between central retinal artery equivalent and age (r = -0.362 [P ≤ .001] and r = -0.404 [P ≤ .001] for MONA REVA and VesselMap, respectively); this was also seen between central retinal vein equivalent and age (r = -0.322 [P ≤ .001] and r = -0.369 [P ≤ .001]). Arteriovenous ratio remained independent from age for both platforms. Bland-Altman plots demonstrated good agreement between the platforms for all three variables.
Conclusions:
Although absolute caliber measurements differed between the platforms, the correlations observed were of similar magnitudes, with good agreement between the two platforms. Tighter spaced limits of agreement were observed when right and left eye data were averaged for each subject. In the absence of localized ocular pathology, this approach should be used.
