• Users Online: 109
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home Current issue Ahead of print Search About us Abstracting and Indexing Editorial board Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents  
LETTER
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 14  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 236

Comparison of retinal and choroidal involvement in sarcoidosis-related chorioretinitis using fluorescein and indocyanine green angiography


Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, TX, USA; Department of Ophthalmology, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

Date of Submission17-Nov-2018
Date of Acceptance12-Dec-2018
Date of Web Publication19-Apr-2019

Correspondence Address:
Touka Banaee
301 University Blvd. Galveston TX 77555-1106, USA

Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jovr.jovr_273_18

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Banaee T. Comparison of retinal and choroidal involvement in sarcoidosis-related chorioretinitis using fluorescein and indocyanine green angiography. J Ophthalmic Vis Res 2019;14:236

How to cite this URL:
Banaee T. Comparison of retinal and choroidal involvement in sarcoidosis-related chorioretinitis using fluorescein and indocyanine green angiography. J Ophthalmic Vis Res [serial online] 2019 [cited 2019 Sep 19];14:236. Available from: http://www.jovr.org/text.asp?2019/14/2/236/256552



Dear Editor,

I read with interest the article by Drs El Ameen and Herbort comparing retinal and choroidal involvement in sarcoidosis.[1] The article highlights a very important issue regarding the diagnosis of activity in posterior uveitis and the role of indocyanine green angiography (ICGA). I appreciate the beautiful work done by the authors, and I would like to share some comments and questions.

I completely agree with the authors that it is reasonable and helpful to have a quantitative basis for diagnosis and scoring of the activity in posterior uveitis, especially choroiditis, and the scoring systems for fluorescein angiography (FA) and ICGA devised by an international group of well-known uveitis specialists (Angiography Scoring for Uveitis Working Group) are reasonable options in this regard.[2] But it seems that as the two scoring systems are for two separate modalities investigating different layers of the posterior segment, one cannot directly compare them, just as we cannot directly compare centimeters and inches or grams. They can be compared based on their rate of positivity in active cases or else their scores can be correlated with a gold standard and compared indirectly.

Another issue I would wish to raise is that considering that the ICGA scores have been purposefully doubled to match the FA scores, how can a score of 14.02 on ICGA be statistically significantly different from a score of 7.15 on FA?

Once again, I appreciate the beautiful work of the authors and hope their response will clarify the subject.

Financial Support and Sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of Interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
El Ameen A, Herbort CP. Comparison of retinal and choroidal Involvement in sarcoidosis-related chorioretinitis using fluorescein and indocyanine green angiography. J Ophthalmic Vis Res 2018;13:426-432.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Tugal-Tutkun I, Herbort CP, Khairallah M. Scoring of dual fluorescein and ICG inflammatory angiographic signs for the grading of posterior segment inflammation (dual fluorescein and ICG angiographic scoring system for uveitis). Int Ophthalmol 2010;30:539-552.  Back to cited text no. 2
    




 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed204    
    Printed12    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded45    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]