Comparison of Nondiabetic Retinal Findings Identified With Nonmydriatic Fundus Photography vs Ultrawide Field Imaging in an Ocular Telehealth Program.

IMPORTANCE: Ultrawide field imaging (UWFI) is increasingly being used in teleophthalmology settings. Given the greater area of the retina imaged, we evaluated the ability of UWFI vs nonmydriatic fundus photography (NMFP) to detect nondiabetic retinal findings in a teleophthalmology program. OBSERVATION: We conducted a retrospective single-center comparative cohort study from January 1, 2011, to June 30, 2013, imaging 3864 and 3971 consecutive teleophthalmology patients (7728 and 7942 eyes) using NMFP and UWFI, respectively. Standard diabetic retinopathy evaluation and nondiabetic findings were compared between the 2 imaging modalities. In patients without diabetic retinopathy (2243 by NMFP and 2252 by UWFI), the rate of identification of nondiabetic findings by NMFP (451 patients [20.1%]) and UWFI (490 [21.8%]) were comparable (P = .19). Ultrawide field imaging increased the identification of choroidal nevi by 27% (406 eyes [5.3%] by NMFP vs 545 eyes [6.9%] by UWFI; P < .001) and chorioretinal atrophy or scarring by 116% (50 eyes [0.6%] by NMFP vs 101 eyes [1.3%] by UWFI; P < .001). No peripheral retinal findings were identified with NMFP, while UWFI detected 25 retinal tears (0.3%; P < .001), 54 lattice and peripheral degenerations (0.7%; P < .001), and 142 cases of vitreous detachment or floaters (1.8%; P < .001). Data analysis was performed from November 1, 2013, to May 1, 2014. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In eyes without diabetic retinopathy, approximately 20% may have ocular findings identified on retinal imaging, which emphasizes the role of retinal imaging in patients with diabetes mellitus type 1 and type 2 regardless of the severity of retinopathy. In this cohort, UWFI increased the identification of peripheral retinal and vitreous pathologic findings.

Real-Time Ultrawide Field Image Evaluation of Retinopathy in a Diabetes Telemedicine Program.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of trained nonphysician retinal imagers to perform diabetic retinopathy (DR) evaluation at the time of ultrawide field retinal (UWF) imaging in a teleophthalmology program. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Clinic patients with diabetes received Joslin Vision Network protocol retinal imaging as part of their standard medical care. Retinal imagers evaluated UWF images for referable DR at the time of image capture. Training of the imagers included 4 h of standardized didactic lectures and 12 h of guided image review. Real-time evaluations were compared with standard masked gradings performed at a centralized reading center. RESULTS: A total of 3,978 eyes of 1,989 consecutive patients were imaged and evaluated. By reading center evaluation, 3,769 eyes (94.7%) were gradable for DR, 1,376 (36.5%) had DR, and 580 (15.3%) had referable DR. Compared with the reading center, real-time image evaluation had a sensitivity and specificity for identifying more than minimal DR of 0.95 (95% CI 0.94-0.97) and 0.84 (0.82-0.85), respectively, and 0.99 (0.97-1.00) and 0.76 (0.75-0.78), respectively, for detecting referable DR. Only three patients with referable DR were not identified by imager evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: Point-of-care evaluation of UWF images by nonphysician imagers following standardized acquisition and evaluation protocols within an established teleophthalmology program had good sensitivity and specificity for detection of DR and for identification of referable retinal disease. With immediate image evaluation, <0.1% of patients with referable DR would be missed, reading center image grading burden would be reduced by 60%, and patient feedback would be expedited.

Potential efficiency benefits of nonmydriatic ultrawide field retinal imaging in an ocular telehealth diabetic retinopathy program.

OBJECTIVE To compare efficiency of nonmydriatic ultrawide field retinal imaging (UWFI) and nonmydriatic fundus photography (NMFP) in a diabetic retinopathy (DR) ocular telehealth program. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Patients in this retrospective, comparative cohort study underwent NMFP and UWFI between 1 November 2011 and 1 November 2012. Images were evaluated for DR and diabetic macular edema (DME) by certified graders using a standard protocol at a centralized reading center. Identification of DR, image evaluation time, and rate of ungradable eyes were compared. RESULTS NMFP and UWFI were performed in 1,633 and 2,170 consecutive patients, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found between groups regarding age, diabetes duration, sex, ethnicity, or insulin use. The ungradable rate per patient for DR (2.9 vs. 9.9%, P < 0.0001) and DME (3.8 vs. 8.8%, P < 0.0001) was lower with UWFI than with NMFP. With UWFI, the median image evaluation time per patient was reduced from 12.8 to 9.2 min (P < 0.0001). The identification of patients with DR (38.4 vs. 33.8%) and vision-threatening DR (14.5 vs. 11.9%) was increased with UWFI versus NMFP. In a consecutive subgroup of 502 eyes of 301 patients with DR, the distribution of peripheral retinal lesions outside Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study fields suggested a more severe DR level in 9.0% (45 eyes). CONCLUSIONS In a standardized DR ocular telehealth program, nonmydriatic UWFI reduced the ungradable rate by 71% (to <3%) and reduced image evaluation time by 28%. DR was identified 17% more frequently after UWFI, and DR peripheral lesions suggested a more severe DR level in 9%. These data suggest that UWFI may improve efficiency of ocular telehealth programs evaluating DR and DME.