Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Optical coherence tomography angiography: an overview of the technology and an assessment of applications for clinical research
Koustenis A, Harris A, Gross J, Januleviciene I, Shah A, Siesky B.. The British journal of ophthalmology, 2016-10-04
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
In recent years, ophthalmology has experienced significant developments with respect to imaging modalities. Optical coherence tomography angiography is one such technology that seeks to improve diagnostics for retinal diseases. Using standard structural ocular coherence tomography hardware, optical coherence tomography angiography demonstrates the ability to non-invasively visualise the vasculature in the retina and the choroid with high resolution, allowing greater insight into retinal vascular pathologies. In addition, retinal and choroidal vessel density and blood flow can be quantified, offering potential to assist in the diagnosis of a variety of retinal diseases. To date, numerous retinal diseases, such as open-angle glaucoma, have been found to possess a vascular component. Specifically, ischaemia of the optic nerve head and lamina cribrosa has been theorised as a causative factor in ganglion cell death; however, confirmation of this mechanism has been prohibited by the limitations of currently existing imaging modalities. Optical coherence tomography angiography provides clear imaging of these regions and the possibility to elucidate further understanding of vascular factors that contribute to glaucoma development and progression. Furthermore, this imaging modality may provide insight to neural pathologies with vascular components such as Alzheimer's disease. Herein, the authors discuss the theory of operation for optical coherence tomography angiography and the current findings from pilot studies with a focus on open-angle glaucoma. In addition, speculation is offered for future applications of the technology to study other diseases with microvascular contributions.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Koustenis, A., Harris, A., Gross, J., Januleviciene, I., Shah, A., & Siesky, B. (2017). Optical coherence tomography angiography: an overview of the technology and an assessment of applications for clinical research. The British journal of ophthalmology. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2016-309389
Vancouver
Koustenis A, Harris A, Gross J, Januleviciene I, Shah A, Siesky B. Optical coherence tomography angiography: an overview of the technology and an assessment of applications for clinical research. The British journal of ophthalmology. 2017. doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2016-309389. PMID: 27707691.
BibTeX
@article{koustenis2017-27707691,
author = {Koustenis, A. and Harris, A. and Gross, J. and Januleviciene, I. and Shah, A. and Siesky, B.},
title = {{Optical coherence tomography angiography: an overview of the technology and an assessment of applications for clinical research}},
journal = {The British journal of ophthalmology},
year = {2017},
doi = {10.1136/bjophthalmol-2016-309389},
pmid = {27707691},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2016-309389}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- In recent years, ophthalmology has experienced significant developments with respect to imaging modalities.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 38/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 22 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 38 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The British journal of ophthalmology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 2 / 5 | 2017 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 27707691) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 22 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 22 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 38 out of 100. |
| Total | 38 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related studies in Brain scans and imaging
Also tagged “tomography-angiography”
5 studies in the library carry the topic tag “tomography-angiography”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 5 tagged studies.