PubMed · 15993238
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
François Dubos, Francis Leclerc. Infants refusing to walk.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(05)66831-6
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Clinically important diagnostic errors are relatively common among polytrauma patients (2-40%). Errors are not random; they are more frequent in the spine and periarticular appendicular skeleton, especially in hemodynamically unstable patients who require resuscitation or operative intervention before completion of secondary or tertiary clinical survey. Misleading history, distracting findings, and misjudgments all contribute to risks of diagnostic errors.
OBJECTIVE: To report the frequency and severity of optical coherence tomography (OCT) retinal thickness measurement errors and to describe parameters that predict these errors. DESIGN: Observational case series. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred consecutive patients undergoing OCT imaging. METHODS: One eye (primary) from each of 200 consecutive patients undergoing Stratus OCT imaging (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin, CA) with radial lines or fast macular thickness-based acquisition protocols was selected for review by 2 graders. On each of the line scans, graders evaluated the position of the automated retinal boundary lines (inner retinal surface and retinal pigment epithelium band) used by the OCT machine for thickness calculations and graded the positioning on a 6-point subjective, categorical error scale to generate an error score. The presence of thickness errors was correlated with various parameters, including the analysis confidence assessment reported by the OCT software, disease diagnosis, retinal morphologic features, the foveal center thickness standard deviation (FCTSD), and the FCTSD-to-foveal center thickness (FCT) ratio. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Average OCT retinal thickness error score. RESULTS: Errors of retinal boundary detection and thickness measurement were observed in 92% of eyes, but were severe in only 13.5% of eyes. The identification of an error or low analysis confidence by the OCT software was strongly associated with the severity of the retinal thickness errors. A higher FCTSD-to-FCT ratio and presence of subretinal fluid also were associated with more severe errors. Retinal cysts and a diagnosis of retinal vascular disease such as diabetic macular edema were less likely to be associated with significant errors. CONCLUSIONS: Retinal thickness measurement errors occur frequently with current OCT segmentation and analysis algorithms. Severe errors are more frequent in eyes with subretinal pathologic features, but generally are detected by the OCT software. A high FCTSD-to-FCT ratio (>0.1) also may alert the clinician to the possibility of thickness errors. Clinical studies, particularly those pertaining to subretinal diseases, should consider these errors when incorporating OCT imaging in the study design.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.