Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 14, 2025
Retinal Vascular Reactivity as Assessed by Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography
Published on: March 26, 2020
The OSCAR-MP Consensus Criteria for Quality Assessment of Retinal Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography
Rebecca Wicklein1, Charmaine Yam1, Christina Noll1
1From the Department of Neurology (R.W., C.N., L.A., N.B., E.F.R., E.W., B.H., B.K.), Klinikum rechts der Isar, TUM School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Germany; Department of Neuroinflammation (C.Y., O.C., A.P., A.T.T.), Queen Square MS Centre, Faculty of Brain Sciences, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London; Neurosciences Institute (C.Y.), Cleveland Clinic London, United Kingdom; Munich Cluster for Systems Neurology (SyNergy) (B.H.), Munich, Germany; Experimental and Clinical Research Center (F.C.O., H.Z., F.P.), Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine and Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin; Einstein Center Digital Future (H.Z.), Berlin; Department of Neurology (P.A., M.R.), Medical Faculty; Department of Neurology (M.R.), Center for Neurology and Neuropsychiatry, LVR-Klinikum, Heinrich-Heine University Düsseldorf; Department of Neurology (P.A.), Maria Hilf Clinics, Mönchengladbach; Department of Ophthalmology (C.B., N.F.), Klinikum rechts der Isar, TUM School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Germany; Department of Ophthalmology (J.P.), University of Basel, Switzerland; Airport Munich Eye Clinic MVZ (N.F.), Germany; Department of Ophthalmology (J.P.), University of Basel, Switzerland; Institute of Clinical Neuroimmunology (J.H., J.A.G.), LMU Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich; Department of Ophthalmology (C.M.), Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany; Department of Neurology (E.S.V., P.A.C., S.S.), Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD; Department of Neuroscience (A.V.D.W.), Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Department of Neurology (O.A.-L.), Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA; Servicio de Neurología (S.C., A.V.-J.), Centre d'Esclerosi Múltiple de Catalunya (Cemcat), Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain; Department of Neurology with Institute of Translational Neurology (J.K., H.W.), University Hospital Münster, Germany; Department of Neurology (J.L.P.), First Medical Faculty, Charles University and General University Hospital in Prague, Czech Republic; National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) University College London Hospitals (UCLH) Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) (O.C.), United Kingdom; Ophthalmology Department (E.G.-M.), Miguel Servet University Hospital, Aragones Institute of Health Sciences, Zaragoza, Spain; Department of Neurology (V.K.), University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland; Moorfields Eye Hospital and The National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery (A.P., A.T.T.), University College London, United Kingdom; and Department of Neurology (A.P.), Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, MS Centre and Neuro-ophthalmology Expertise Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Netherlands.
Background And Objectives:
Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) is a noninvasive high-resolution imaging technique for assessing the retinal vasculature and is increasingly used in various ophthalmologic, neuro-ophthalmologic, and neurologic diseases. To date, there are no validated consensus criteria for quality control (QC) of OCTA. Our study aimed to develop criteria for OCTA quality assessment.
Methods:
To establish criteria through (1) extensive literature review on OCTA artifacts and image quality to generate standardized and easy-to-apply OCTA QC criteria, (2) application of OCTA QC criteria to evaluate interrater agreement, (3) identification of reasons for interrater disagreement, revision of OCTA QC criteria, development of OCTA QC scoring guide and training set, and (4) validation of QC criteria in an international, interdisciplinary multicenter study.
Results:
We identified 7 major aspects that affect OCTA quality: (O) obvious problems, (S) signal strength, (C) centration, (A) algorithm failure, (R) retinal pathology, (M) motion artifacts, and (P) projection artifacts. Seven independent raters applied the OSCAR-MP criteria to a set of 40 OCTA scans from people with MS, Sjogren syndrome, and uveitis and healthy individuals. The interrater kappa was substantial (κ 0.67). Projection artifacts were the main reason for interrater disagreement. Because artifacts can affect only parts of OCTA images, we agreed that prior definition of a specific region of interest (ROI) is crucial for subsequent OCTA quality assessment. To enhance artifact recognition and interrater agreement on reduced image quality, we designed a scoring guide and OCTA training set. Using these educational tools, 23 raters from 14 different centers reached an almost perfect agreement (κ 0.92) for the rejection of poor-quality OCTA images using the OSCAR-MP criteria.
Discussion:
We propose a 3-step approach for standardized quality control: (1) To define a specific ROI, (2) to assess the occurrence of OCTA artifacts according to the OSCAR-MP criteria, and (3) to evaluate OCTA quality based on the occurrence of different artifacts within the ROI. OSCAR-MP OCTA QC criteria achieved high interrater agreement in an international multicenter study and is a promising QC protocol for application in the context of future clinical trials and studies.
