Standardization of OCT Angiography Nomenclature in Retinal Vascular Diseases: Consensus-Based Recommendations
- PMID: 39894444
- DOI: 10.1016/j.oret.2025.01.015
Standardization of OCT Angiography Nomenclature in Retinal Vascular Diseases: Consensus-Based Recommendations
Abstract
Objective: To develop a consensus nomenclature for OCT angiography (OCTA) findings in retinal vascular diseases (RVDs).
Design: Expert consensus using standardized online surveys with modified Likert scale.
Participants: Retinal vascular disease 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; interquartile range [IQR] ≤3), "Strong Consensus" (median ≥8; IQR ≤2), and "Refined Strong Consensus" (median ≥8, IQR ≤2, with ≥70% of responses in the 8-10 range). A multidisciplinary expert panel refined the terminology through 3 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 3 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.
Financial disclosure(s): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
Keywords: International Retina Imaging Society; Nomenclature; OCT angiography; Retinal vascular diseases; Standardization.
Copyright © 2025 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous
