Background and Objectives Optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) is a noninvasive high-resolution imaging technique for assessing the retinal vasculature and is increasingly used in various ophthalmologic, neuro-ophthalmologic, and neurologic diseases. To date, there are no validated consensus criteria for quality control (QC) of OCTA. Our study aimed to develop criteria for OCTA quality assessment. Methods To establish criteria through (1) extensive literature review on OCTA artifacts and image quality to generate standardized and easy-to-apply OCTA QC criteria, (2) application of OCTA QC criteria to evaluate interrater agreement, (3) identification of reasons for interrater disagreement, revision of OCTA QC criteria, development of OCTA QC scoring guide and training set, and (4) validation of QC criteria in an international, interdisciplinary multicenter study. Results We identified 7 major aspects that affect OCTA quality: (O) obvious problems, (S) signal strength, (C) centration, (A) algorithm failure, (R) retinal pathology, (M) motion artifacts, and (P) projection artifacts. Seven independent raters applied the OSCAR-MP criteria to a set of 40 OCTA scans from people with MS, Sjogren syndrome, and uveitis and healthy individuals. The interrater kappa was substantial (κ 0.67). Projection artifacts were the main reason for interrater disagreement. Because artifacts can affect only parts of OCTA images, we agreed that prior definition of a specific region of interest (ROI) is crucial for subsequent OCTA quality assessment. To enhance artifact recognition and interrater agreement on reduced image quality, we designed a scoring guide and OCTA training set. Using these educational tools, 23 raters from 14 different centers reached an almost perfect agreement (κ 0.92) for the rejection of poor-quality OCTA images using the OSCAR-MP criteria. Discussion We propose a 3-step approach for standardized quality control: (1) To define a specific ROI, (2) to assess the occurrence of OCTA artifacts according to the OSCAR-MP criteria, and (3) to evaluate OCTA quality based on the occurrence of different artifacts within the ROI. OSCAR-MP OCTA QC criteria achieved high interrater agreement in an international multicenter study and is a promising QC protocol for application in the context of future clinical trials and studies.

Purpose: To investigate changes in the area of the foveal avascular zone (FAZ) in patients with retinal vascular disease. Patients and methods: This retrospective, consecutive study examined 53 eyes of 53 patients with macular edema due to branch retinal vein occlusion in 25 patients (47.2%) and nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy in 28 patients (52.8%). The macular edema was treated with an intravitreal injection of 0.05 mL equal to 1.25 mg bevacizumab. Before and 6–8 weeks after the injection, best corrected visual acuity, slit lamp biomicroscopy of the anterior segment and fundus, optical coherence tomography, and fluorescein angiography were conducted. The FAZ was manually circumscribed on early-phase angiography images and the area of the FAZ was measured. Results: The preoperative overall mean FAZ area was 0.327 ± 0.126 mm² (median 0.310 mm²). At the control consultation, the overall mean area was significantly larger (0.422 ± 0.259 mm²; median 0.380 mm²; P < 0.001). In the nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy subpopulation, the mean area was 0.361 ± 0.129 mm² (median 0.330 mm²) before bevacizumab application and 0.434 mm² at the follow-up visit (mean increase 0.071 mm²/19.7%). In the branch retinal vein occlusion group, the baseline FAZ area was 0.290 ± 0.115 mm² and 0.407 ± 0.350 mm² at follow-up (median 0.330 mm²; mean increase 0.117 mm²/40.3%). No cases of severe operation-associated complications were observed. Conclusion: The results confirm the safety of intravitreal bevacizumab injection in patients with macular edema due to nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy and branch retinal vein occlusion. The enlargement of the FAZ could be equivalent to an increase in retinal ischemia. These results may be transient; a potential vascular risk, however, when applying antivascular endothelial growth factor therapy in eyes with preexistent vascular disease must be considered.

To introduce an ETDRS grid-based classification for macula involving retinal detachment (MIRD) with or without center (foveal) involvement and to identify biomarkers in preoperative optical coherence tomography (OCT) associated with a favorable postoperative functional outcome in eyes with center involving retinal detachment (CIRD). One hundred and two eyes of 102 consecutive patients (f/m: 35/67) with primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachment, preoperative evidence of MIRD (perifoveal involvement of ≤ 6.0 mm), and successful retinal surgery were included in this retrospective cohort study. Eyes were assigned to 5 grades of MIRD (G1–G5), based on the extent of detachment in the ETDRS grid. Eyes with a detached foveal status (CIRD) were assigned to G4 or G5. In CIRD, the following OCT biomarkers were quantified and correlated with mean BCVA (logMAR) at 3 months postsurgery, using univariate and multivariable regression models: grade of detachment, extent of intraretinal edema, height of foveal detachment, subretinal folds, and epiretinal membrane. Forty-one of 102 eyes (40.2%) presented with an attached foveal status, defined as either outer (G1: 11.8%) or inner (G2: 18.6%) macular involvement or fovea-threatening MIRD (G3: 9.8%). Sixty-one eyes (59.8%) showed CIRD (G4 or G5). Eyes with CIRD had significantly worse postoperative BCVA than eyes without foveal involvement (0.355 logMAR vs. 0.138 logMAR, p<0.001). If CIRD was limited to three outer ETDRS quadrants (G4), mean BCVA was better compared to CIRD involving all four ETDRS quadrants (G5) (0.254 logMAR vs. 0.522 logMAR, p<0.001). Reading ability (BCVA ≤ 0.4 logMAR) was restored in 97.6% of eyes with G1–G3 compared to 86.9% of eyes with G4 (p=0.072) and 52.4% of eyes with G5 (p<0.001). In multivariable regression analysis of eyes with CIRD, a lower grade of detachment (G4 vs. G5: p<0.05) and lower extent of cystoid edema (focal/none vs. wide: p<0.001) were both associated with better postoperative function. The functional outcome after MIRD may be worse in the presence of foveal involvement (CIRD), but a lower grade of detachment and the absence of intraretinal edema can predict a good recovery in spite of CIRD.