Comparison of the clinical diagnosis of diabetic macular edema with diagnosis by optical coherence tomography.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the diagnosis of diabetic macular edema (DME) by stereoscopic slit-lamp biomicroscopic examination of the fundus with a 78-diopter noncontact lens with diagnosis by optical coherence tomography (OCT).


METHODS
Prospective, double-masked, noninterventional diagnostic study.


METHODS
Analysis of slit-lamp biomicroscopic findings compared with OCT measurements.


METHODS
Patients with DME from a private retina practice.


METHODS
Presence or absence of macular thickening.


RESULTS
The reference range for this clinic was comparable to reference ranges published from other clinics. The clinical detection of DME was less than detection by OCT. Chance-corrected agreements (kappa statistic) of the 2 methods were 0.63 for the foveal zone and 0.36 to 0.42 for the 4 parafoveal zones. The errors committed in clinical examination were primarily of the type in which clinical examination did not detect DME but OCT did (58%-90%) for the 5 zones analyzed.


CONCLUSIONS
Reference ranges for OCT seem to be similar for different clinical settings, suggesting the usefulness of OCT in multicenter studies. The current standard of care for DME detection, stereoscopic slit-lamp examination of the fundus, is less sensitive than OCT for detection of DME. Because the principal therapy for DME, focal laser photocoagulation, is mainly sight preserving and not sight restoring, the wider use of OCT may beneficially impact visual disability from DME.
Browning
David J
DJ
Charlotte Eye, Ear, Nose, and Throat Associates, 6035 Fairview Road, Charlotte, NC 28210, USA. djbrowning@carolina.rr.com
McOwen
Michael D
MD
Bowen
Robert M
RM
O'Marah
Tisha L
TL
D003930:Diabetic Retinopathy / Q000175:diagnosis*; D004311:Double-Blind Method; D006801:Humans; D008266:Macula Lutea / Q000473:pathology; D008269:Macular Edema / Q000175:diagnosis*; D011446:Prospective Studies; D041623:Tomography, Optical Coherence / Q000379:methods*