z-logo
Premium
Method comparison of two non‐invasive dual‐wavelength spectrophotometric retinal oximeters in healthy young subjects during normoxia
Author(s) -
Told Reinhard,
Boltz Agnes,
Schmetterer Leopold,
Garhöfer Gerhard,
Sacu Stefan,
SchmidtErfurth Ursula,
Pollreisz Andreas
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
acta ophthalmologica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.534
H-Index - 87
eISSN - 1755-3768
pISSN - 1755-375X
DOI - 10.1111/aos.13719
Subject(s) - earlobe , medicine , pulse oximetry , confidence interval , repeatability , retinal , oxygen saturation , ophthalmology , limits of agreement , standard deviation , anesthesia , surgery , nuclear medicine , oxygen , mathematics , chemistry , statistics , organic chemistry
Purpose Spectrophotometric retinal oximetry is a non‐invasive technology for measuring oxygen saturation in arterioles and venules (SaO 2 , SvO 2 ). We compared two commercially available systems: the Oxymap T1 (Oxymap ehf., Reykjavik, Iceland) and the Dynamic Vessel Analyzer ( DVA , Imedos, Jena, Germany). Methods Twenty healthy adults were included after giving informed consent. Two measurement cycles 30 min apart, including Oxymap T1, DVA , arterialized capillary blood draw of the earlobe (ScO 2 ) and peripheral oxygen saturation using finger pulse oximetry (SpO 2 ) were scheduled. Results SaO 2 (p > 0.0004) but not SvO 2 (p < 0.05) was statistically significantly different between the retinal oximeters used. Agreement between devices using repeated SO 2 measurements resulted in a standard deviation ( SD ) of differences of 3.5% in retinal arterioles and 4.8% in venules. Bland–Altman plot using the mean of a participant's two measurements from each device showed an average mean difference of 4.4% (95% confidence limits of agreement: −8.6 to 17.4) and −3.3% (95% confidence limits of agreement: −28.8 to 22.2) for SaO 2 and SvO 2 , respectively. Comparison of mean SaO 2 and SvO 2 with mean ScO 2 and SpO 2 indicated that SO 2 measurements were generally higher in ScO 2 and SpO 2 . Conclusion This study shows very good repeatability for both devices, which is consistent with the literature. However, it does not show sufficient concordance between SaO 2 measurements from both devices, indicating that patients should be followed by one device only. Differences in absorbance wavelengths used and image post‐processing may explain the differences.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here