Purpose. To evaluate FA vs ICGA in identifying an occult CNV in ARMD. Methods. 79 eyes affected by ARMD with suspected occult CNV were evaluated both with FA and ICGA. Two espert operators evaluated independently the following parameters in FA and ICGA: absence of CNV, presence of focal CNV, CNV with plaque, mixed forms, multifocal forms. The K index was determined (overlapping FA and ICGA results for both operators). Results. ICGA interpretation resulted the same in 67 cases (85%) and different in 12 (15%). In the plaque CNVs overlapping results were found between FA and ICGA in 59% with the first operator and in 26% in the second (K=0,430 vs K=0,133); the focal CNVs were the same in 76,9% and in 47,6% (K-0,544 vs K=0,064); in the multifocal CNVs in 42,9% and in 25% (K=0,460 vs K=0.340). Conclusions. The ICGA interpretation of the lesions resulted differently in 15,2% of the cases. It was found that for both operators, the plaque CNV was more difficult to interpret in reading the FA, in comparison with the focal CNV. On the whole, there is a difference in the evaluation of CNV between FA and ICGA in 39% for the first operator, and in 63% for the second. Therefore, ICGA is currently an indispensable diagnostic exam in evaluating the presence, the type and the localization of an occult CNV.
|Journal||Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science|
|Publication status||Published - 1997|
ASJC Scopus subject areas