Standardization of Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography Nomenclature in Retinal Vascular Diseases: Consensus-based Recommendations.
Options
BORIS DOI
Date of Publication
July 2025
Publication Type
Article
Division/Institute
Author
Faes, Livia | |
Freund, K Bailey | |
Sadda, Srinivas R | |
Peto, Tunde | |
Wang, Ruikang K | |
Pircher, Michael | |
Curcio, Christine A | |
Sun, Jennifer | |
Kashani, Amir H |
Subject(s)
Series
Ophthalmology Retina
ISSN or ISBN (if monograph)
2468-6530
2468-7219
Publisher
Elsevier
Language
English
Publisher DOI
PubMed ID
39894444
Description
Objective
To develop a consensus nomenclature for Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography (OCTA) findings in retinal vascular diseases (RVD).
Design
Expert consensus using standardized online surveys with modified Likert scale.
Participants
RVD imaging experts, OCT biomedical engineers and the members of the International Retinal Imaging Society (IntRIS) METHODS: A PubMed literature review identified quantitative and qualitative terms forming the basis for a consensus-building process using a modified Delphi method. Agreement levels were categorized as "Accepted" (median ≥ 6), "Considerable Consensus" (median 6-7, IQR ≤ 3), "Strong Consensus" (median ≥ 8, IQR ≤ 2), and "Refined Strong Consensus" (median ≥ 8, IQR ≤ 2, with ≥ 70% responses in the 8-10 range). A multidisciplinary expert panel refined the terminology through three survey rounds, leading to a final survey conducted by IntRIS members.
Main Outcome Measures
Consensus on OCTA nomenclature in RVD RESULTS: The literature review identified 58 relevant papers, yielding 51 quantitative and 108 qualitative terms. A series of three surveys was used to refine the nomenclature framework for describing OCTA findings. The selected framework includes a generic term ("OCTA signal"), adjective terms ("presence/absence", "decreased/increased", "normal/abnormal"), and descriptive/etiologic terms ("of unknown cause", "due to blockage", "due to non-perfusion"). In the final survey among 44 IntRIS members, the framework achieved strong consensus for overall acceptance (median: 8.0, IQR: 7.0-9.0). The term "OCTA signal" met refined strong consensus criteria (median: 8.0, IQR: 8.0-9.0, with ≥ 70% of responses in the 8-10 range). Adjective terms, including "absence/presence" and "increased/decreased," were also rated with strong consensus (median: 8.0, IQR: 7.0-9.0). Similarly, descriptive/etiologic terms achieved strong consensus (median: 8.0, IQR: 7.0-9.0). Adoption of the framework for clinical practice and scientific reporting was rated with strong consensus (clinical: median 8.0, IQR: 7.0-9.0; scientific: median 9.0, IQR: 8.5-10.0).
Conclusions
This study establishes a strong consensus framework for reporting OCTA findings in RVD for clinical and scientific contexts.
To develop a consensus nomenclature for Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography (OCTA) findings in retinal vascular diseases (RVD).
Design
Expert consensus using standardized online surveys with modified Likert scale.
Participants
RVD imaging experts, OCT biomedical engineers and the members of the International Retinal Imaging Society (IntRIS) METHODS: A PubMed literature review identified quantitative and qualitative terms forming the basis for a consensus-building process using a modified Delphi method. Agreement levels were categorized as "Accepted" (median ≥ 6), "Considerable Consensus" (median 6-7, IQR ≤ 3), "Strong Consensus" (median ≥ 8, IQR ≤ 2), and "Refined Strong Consensus" (median ≥ 8, IQR ≤ 2, with ≥ 70% responses in the 8-10 range). A multidisciplinary expert panel refined the terminology through three survey rounds, leading to a final survey conducted by IntRIS members.
Main Outcome Measures
Consensus on OCTA nomenclature in RVD RESULTS: The literature review identified 58 relevant papers, yielding 51 quantitative and 108 qualitative terms. A series of three surveys was used to refine the nomenclature framework for describing OCTA findings. The selected framework includes a generic term ("OCTA signal"), adjective terms ("presence/absence", "decreased/increased", "normal/abnormal"), and descriptive/etiologic terms ("of unknown cause", "due to blockage", "due to non-perfusion"). In the final survey among 44 IntRIS members, the framework achieved strong consensus for overall acceptance (median: 8.0, IQR: 7.0-9.0). The term "OCTA signal" met refined strong consensus criteria (median: 8.0, IQR: 8.0-9.0, with ≥ 70% of responses in the 8-10 range). Adjective terms, including "absence/presence" and "increased/decreased," were also rated with strong consensus (median: 8.0, IQR: 7.0-9.0). Similarly, descriptive/etiologic terms achieved strong consensus (median: 8.0, IQR: 7.0-9.0). Adoption of the framework for clinical practice and scientific reporting was rated with strong consensus (clinical: median 8.0, IQR: 7.0-9.0; scientific: median 9.0, IQR: 8.5-10.0).
Conclusions
This study establishes a strong consensus framework for reporting OCTA findings in RVD for clinical and scientific contexts.
File(s)
| File | File Type | Format | Size | License | Publisher/Copright statement | Content | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1-s2.0-S2468653025000478-main.pdf | text | Adobe PDF | 1.02 MB | Attribution (CC BY 4.0) | accepted |