What question did this study set out to answer?

To compare radial and horizontal raster spectral-domain OCT scan patterns and evaluate the impact of different chorio-scleral interface boundary delineations on choroidal vascularity index measurements.

August 16, 2026Ophthalmic and Physiological OpticsOpen Access

Impact of Optical Coherence Tomography Scan Pattern and Chorio-Scleral Interface Delineation on Choroidal Vascularity Index Measurements

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

KWKryshell Yu Qi Wong RCRachel Ka Man Chun DADavid Alonso‐Caneiro

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Observational study finds radial and raster OCT scans yield similar choroidal vascularity index values in healthy adults, highlighting boundary standardization needs.

Key Points

To compare radial and horizontal raster spectral-domain OCT scan patterns and evaluate the impact of different chorio-scleral interface boundary delineations on choroidal vascularity index measurements.
Analyzed 25 eyes from 25 healthy adults (aged 21–31 years, 72% female, mean spherical equivalent −2.97 ± 2.02 D) using 12-line radial and 31-line horizontal raster scans with enhanced depth imaging.
Manually measured CVI across three posterior chorio-scleral interface boundaries (upper vascular, middle vascular–stromal, and lower stromal) and evaluated agreement via Bland-Altman analysis and two-way repeated-measures ANOVA across 6-mm ETDRS subfields.
Mean CVI differences ranged from 1.43% to 2.38% between upper and middle boundaries, 1.23% to 2.04% between middle and lower boundaries, and 2.90% to 4.42% between upper and lower boundaries.
Scan patterns demonstrated good agreement with a coefficient of variation <2%; raster scans measured 0.51% higher CVI in the central fovea, while radial scans measured 0.64–1.10% higher CVI perifoveally.
Significant differences between scan patterns appeared only in the outer temporal subfield (−1.10%, p = 0.005) and outer ring (−0.77%, p = 0.02), with lowest overall CVI values found in the outer nasal subfield, nasal quadrant, and outer ring.

Cite This Study

Wong et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a817a72f2fb91fc834ae4a7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s44402-026-00159-4

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

August 16, 2026Ophthalmic and Physiological OpticsOpen Access

Impact of Optical Coherence Tomography Scan Pattern and Chorio-Scleral Interface Delineation on Choroidal Vascularity Index Measurements

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

KWKryshell Yu Qi Wong RCRachel Ka Man Chun DADavid Alonso‐Caneiro

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Observational study finds radial and raster OCT scans yield similar choroidal vascularity index values in healthy adults, highlighting boundary standardization needs.

Key Points

To compare radial and horizontal raster spectral-domain OCT scan patterns and evaluate the impact of different chorio-scleral interface boundary delineations on choroidal vascularity index measurements.
Analyzed 25 eyes from 25 healthy adults (aged 21–31 years, 72% female, mean spherical equivalent −2.97 ± 2.02 D) using 12-line radial and 31-line horizontal raster scans with enhanced depth imaging.
Manually measured CVI across three posterior chorio-scleral interface boundaries (upper vascular, middle vascular–stromal, and lower stromal) and evaluated agreement via Bland-Altman analysis and two-way repeated-measures ANOVA across 6-mm ETDRS subfields.
Mean CVI differences ranged from 1.43% to 2.38% between upper and middle boundaries, 1.23% to 2.04% between middle and lower boundaries, and 2.90% to 4.42% between upper and lower boundaries.
Scan patterns demonstrated good agreement with a coefficient of variation <2%; raster scans measured 0.51% higher CVI in the central fovea, while radial scans measured 0.64–1.10% higher CVI perifoveally.
Significant differences between scan patterns appeared only in the outer temporal subfield (−1.10%, p = 0.005) and outer ring (−0.77%, p = 0.02), with lowest overall CVI values found in the outer nasal subfield, nasal quadrant, and outer ring.

Cite This Study

Wong et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a817a72f2fb91fc834ae4a7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s44402-026-00159-4

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark