Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Jan;31(1):45-52.
doi: 10.1038/eye.2016.232. Epub 2016 Nov 4.

Comparison of Indocyanine Green Angiography and Optical Coherence Tomographic Angiography in Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy

Affiliations
Free PMC article

Comparison of Indocyanine Green Angiography and Optical Coherence Tomographic Angiography in Polypoidal Choroidal Vasculopathy

K Takayama et al. Eye (Lond). .
Free PMC article

Abstract

PurposeTo compare optical coherence tomographic angiography (OCTA) and indocyanine green angiography (ICGA) images for detecting polypoidal lesions (PLs) and branching vascular networks (BVNs), and to measure the polypoidal areas (PAs) in patients with polypoidal choroidal vasculopathy (PCV).MethodsAll patients underwent ICGA, optical coherence tomography (OCT), and OCTA. We compared the detection sensitivity for PL and BVN, as evaluated by the ICGA and OCTA images. Furthermore, PA measured by ICGA was divided into two groups: one in which the area could be measured by OCTA (ICGA+OCTA+) and the other in which the area could not be measured by OCTA (ICGA+OCTA-).ResultsTwenty-one consecutive eyes of 21 patients (mean age, 73.8±9.8 years) were included. ICGA detected PL in all eyes (100%), whereas OCTA detected PL in 16 eyes (75.2%); ICGA detected BVN in 15 eyes (71.4%), whereas OCTA detected BVN in 20 eyes (95.2%). The mean PA in ICGA+OCTA+ and ICGA+OCTA- was 0.24±0.04 and 0.14±0.01 mm2, respectively; a significant difference was observed between ICGA+OCTA+ PA and ICGA+OCTA- PA (P<0.0001). In addition, the mean PA in the ICGA+OCTA+ group measured by ICGA and OCTA was 0.24±0.04 was 0.19±0.04 mm2, respectively; these values were significantly different (P=0.0046).ConclusionsOCTA might detect more BVNs and fewer PLs compared with ICGA, and PL detected by OCTA might be smaller than those detected by ICGA.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Case 1, in which both ICGA and OCTA could detect PL and BVN. Colour fundus (a), OCT image (b), ICGA image (c), and OCTA image (d). White arrow: PL. Black arrow: BVN. PL and BVN were detected at the same position in ICGA and OCTA, and PAs were 0.49 mm2 in ICGA and 0.46 mm2 in OCTA.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Case 11, in which ICGA could detect only PL, although OCTA detected PL and BVN. Colour fundus (a), OCT image (b), ICGA image (c), and OCTA image (d). White arrow: PL. Black arrow: BVN. In the ICGA image, BVN was unclear, although it appeared clearly in the OCTA images. The PAs were 0.20 mm2 in ICGA and 0.19 mm2 in OCTA.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Case 16, in which ICGA, but not OCTA, detected PL. Colour fundus (a), OCT image (b), ICGA image (c), and OCTA image (d). White arrow: PL. Black arrow: BVN. BVN was detected by ICGA and OCTA, and was observed with highly bright vascularity, although PL was shown in dark spot in OCTA. The PA was 0.20 mm2 in ICGA.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Detection percentages of PL and BVN, and the differences between the PA detected by OCTA and not detected by OCTA, and the PA measured by ICGA and by OCTA. ICGA detected PL more often than ICGA, although ICGA detected BVN less often than OCTA. (a) The mean PAs measured from the ICGA images in all eyes, eyes detected by OCTA (ICGA+OCTA+), and eyes that were not detected by OCTA (ICGA+OCTA). (b) The mean PA measured from the ICGA and OCTA images in 15 eyes. (c) The blots of PA of each eye in ICGA and OCTA (d).

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 12 articles

See all "Cited by" articles
Feedback