Comparison of two ultra-widefield imaging for detecting peripheral retinal breaks requiring treatment

Aim To compare the sensitivity of Optomap Panoramic 200 and Clarus 500 in detecting peripheral retinal breaks that required treatment. Methods This prospective study enrolled consecutive patients undergoing laser for treatment-requiring peripheral retinal breaks from May 2019 to July 2019. The patients first underwent indirect ophthalmoscopy examination with scleral indentation by a retinal consultant and then ultra-widefield imaging by a single trained technician on Optomap 200 and Clarus 500 in all nine ocular gazes. The images were analysed by two independent investigators to look for the number and location of the breaks. The sensitivity of each platform was calculated as the number of treatment-requiring breaks identified by the system divided by the number of breaks identified on clinical examination. Results Clinical examination of 49 eyes (41 patients) showed 116 treatment-requiring breaks. Overall sensitivity for identifying such breaks for Optomap and Clarus was 80.2% (n= 93) and 74.1% (n= 86) respectively (p= 0.274). The sensitivities in superior (p= 0.665), temporal (p= 0.146) and inferior (p= 0.889) quadrants were statistically similar for both the platforms. The sensitivity of Optomap was slightly higher than Clarus in emmetropic (p= 0.046) and phakic (p= 0.061) eyes, but similar in myopic (p= 0.448) and pseudophakic (p= 0.191) eyes. Conclusion The ability to detect treatment-requiring retinal breaks is similar for both Optomap and Clarus systems.