Title of article :
Relevance of Multicolor Imaging in Type 2 Macular Telangiectasia
Author/Authors :
Venkatesh, Ramesh Department of Retina and Vitreous - Narayana Nethralaya - Bengaluru - Karnataka, India , Pereira, Arpitha Department of Retina and Vitreous - Narayana Nethralaya - Bengaluru - Karnataka, India , Bavaharan, Bharathi Department of Retina and Vitreous - Narayana Nethralaya - Bengaluru - Karnataka, India , Jain, Kushagra Department of Retina and Vitreous - Narayana Nethralaya - Bengaluru - Karnataka, India , Aseem, Aditya Department of Retina and Vitreous - Narayana Nethralaya - Bengaluru - Karnataka, India , Sangai, Sajjan Department of Retina and Vitreous - Narayana Nethralaya - Bengaluru - Karnataka, India , Kumar Yadav, Naresh Department of Retina and Vitreous - Narayana Nethralaya - Bengaluru - Karnataka, India
Abstract :
Purpose: To report the imaging characteristics of various clinical features in idiopathic macular telangiectasia (MacTel 2) on multicolor imaging (MCI) and compare its accuracy vis‑à‑vis color fundus photograph (CFP) and fluorescein angiography (FA).
Methods: In this retrospective observational study, 54 eyes of 27 patients with MacTel 2 were included after institutional review board
approval. Multimodal imaging with CFP, optical coherence tomography (OCT), MCI, and FA was done. Images were analyzed to identify
and describe the clinical findings in MacTel 2. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were computed for the
various imaging modalities in MacTel 2.
Results: In this study, the MCI identified all the different clinical features of MacTel 2 in 100% of cases. The confocal blue reflectance (BR)
image was more sensitive than CFP (100% vs. 96.3%) in identifying the loss of retinal transparency in MacTel 2. For other clinical features
such as right‑angled vessels, superficial retinal crystals, and retinal pigment epithelial hyperplasia/plaques, the sensitivity of BR, and green
reflectance (GR) image, was comparable to that of CFP. Confocal infrared reflectance (IR) images showed poor sensitivity in identifying
the non-proliferative features in MacTel 2 (P < 0.001). Loss of retinal transparency was not picked up on IR image. Other features such as
right‑angled vessels, superficial retinal crystals, and pigment plaques were seen in 20%, 4.6%, and 26.3% of cases, respectively. However,
confocal IR images were superior to FA (100% vs. 47%) and CFP (100% vs. 15%) in identifying the extent and location of subretinal neovascular
membrane. The confocal BR and GR images were unable to identify the choroidal neovascular membrane (P < 0.001).
Conclusion: MCI is a useful and non-invasive imaging modality to identify the clinical features in MacTel 2. MCI can be used as a complementary
imaging tool to CFP, FA, and OCT.
Keywords :
Choroidal neovascular membrane , Idiopathic macular telangiectasia , Imaging , Multicolor imaging
Journal title :
Journal of Current Ophthalmology