Is optical coherence tomography angiography helpful in the differential diagnosis of choroidal nevus versus melanoma?

PURPOSE: To describe the imaging features of choroidal nevus and melanoma using optical coherence tomography angiography, and evaluate the ability of this technique to establish the differential diagnosis based on the display of the tumor's intrinsic vasculature. METHODS: Comparative analysis of optical coherence tomography angiography findings in consecutive patients diagnosed with choroidal nevus or choroidal melanoma following a complete ophthalmic evaluation, including best-corrected visual acuity and several imaging studies: color fundus photography, B-scan ultrasound, spectral-domain optical coherence tomography, and optical coherence tomography angiography. Optical coherence tomography angiography was used to investigate qualitative differences in the tumor vasculature. RESULTS: Thirty-six eyes (18 cases of choroidal nevus and 18 cases of choroidal melanoma) from 36 consecutive patients were included in the study. Only cases located posterior to equator were included to enable performance of all tests. On optical coherence tomography angiography, choroidal nevus showed well-delimited margins (78%), hyperreflective choroid capillary vasculature (83%), fewer avascular areas (17%), and neovascular membrane in one case (6%). Choroidal melanoma showed imprecise margins (72%), hyporeflective choroidal capillary vasculature (72%), multiple avascular areas (78%), and choroidal vascular changes (e.g. thick vascular networks or vascular loops; 45%). CONCLUSION: Optical coherence tomography angiography can provide useful information for assessing and differentiating between choroidal nevi and small melanomas. Significant differences between these conditions were found for the pattern of reflectivity, and presence/absence of avascular zones and vascular anomalies, which could be helpful for supporting the diagnosis.

Comparison of Anatomical and Visual Outcomes between Idiopathic and Myopic Macular Holes Using the Internal Limiting Membrane or Inverted Internal Limiting Membrane Flap Technique.

PURPOSE: To compare the results of vitrectomy with those of internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling or inverted ILM flap for treating myopic or idiopathic macular hole. METHODS: Thirty-nine eyes of 39 patients undergoing vitrectomy with ILM peeling for macular hole (25 idiopathic and 14 myopic) and 27 eyes of 27 patients undergoing vitrectomy with inverted ILM flap (15 idiopathic and 12 myopic) were included. Outcome measures were macular hole closure by optical coherence tomography and visual acuity at 6 months. RESULTS: Closure was achieved in 25 (100%) idiopathic and 12 (86%) myopic macular holes in the ILM peeling group and in 14 (93%) idiopathic and 11 (91.77%) macular holes in the inverted ILM flap group. There were no statistically significant differences in restoration of the external limiting membrane and ellipsoid zone between the groups. Median best-corrected visual acuity (logarithm of minimal angle of resolution) at the end of follow-up was 0.22 (20/32 Snellen) in idiopathic and 0.4 (20/50) in myopic (P=0.042) patients in the ILM peeling group and 0.4 (20/50) in idiopathic and 0.4 (20/50) in myopic (P=0.652) patients in the inverted ILM flap group. CONCLUSION: Both techniques were associated with high closure rates in myopic and idiopathic macular holes, with somewhat better visual outcomes in idiopathic cases. The small sample size may have provided insufficient power to support the superiority of one technique over the other in the two groups.