Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 10801
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 68  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 861-866

Validation of multicolor imaging signatures of central serous chorioretinopathy lesions vis-a-vis conventional color fundus photographs

1 Department of Vitreo Retina, Kamalnayan Bajaj Sankara Nethralaya, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
2 Department of Vitreo Retina, Aditya Birla Sankara Nethralaya, Kolkata, West Bengal, India

Correspondence Address:
Kumar Saurabh
Kamalnayan Bajaj Sankara Nethralaya, DJ16, Action Area 1D, Newtown, Kolkata - 700 156, West Bengal
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/ijo.IJO_1187_19

Rights and Permissions

Purpose: The current study compares the ability of multicolor imaging (MCI) to detect the lesions of central serous chorioretinopathy against conventional color fundus photographs (CFP). Methods: It was a retrospective, observational case series of 93 eyes of 58 patients of central serous chorioretinopathy who underwent MCI and CFP. MCI and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT) were performed using Spectralis SD-OCT system (HRA + OCT). CFP was obtained using FF 450 Plus fundus camera (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Jena, Germany). SD-OCT was considered gold standard for subretinal fluid (SRF) and retinal pigment epithelium detachment (PED). CFP was considered confirmatory investigation for fibrin and blue autofluorescence image (BAF) was considered gold standard to detect retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) atrophy. Results: CFP could detect SRF in 41 (44.1%) eyes. MCI detected SRF in 43 (46.2%) eyes. The sensitivity and specificity of MCI to detect SRF were 70.7% and 94.3%, respectively. PED was detected by CFP in 21 (22.6%) eyes and MCI in 27 (29%) eyes. The sensitivity and specificity of MCI to detect PED were 70% and 97.7% respectively. CFP could pick RPE atrophy in 52 (55.9%) eyes whereas MCI was picked it in 78 (83.9%) of eyes. Conclusion: Both MCI and CFP were inferior to a gold standard in identifying the SRF, PED, and RPE atrophy. However, MCI was better than CFP in comparison with gold standard for these clinical findings in CSC. Thus, MCI seems to be a more valuable imaging tool compared to CFP.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded54    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal