Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the reproducibility of vessel density calculations using different binarization methods obtained via two commercially available swept-source optical coherence tomography angiography (SS-OCTA) systems. METHODS: Healthy volunteers were imaged using two swept-source optical coherence tomography angiography (SS-OCTA) devices, PLEXElite and Triton. SS-OCTA examinations were performed using a 3 × 3-mm volume scan pattern centered on the fovea. A total of six methods were used for binarization in ImageJ, two global thresholding and four local adaptive thresholding methods. Resultant vessel density values were compared between the instruments and binarization methods. Images for 60 eyes from 30 healthy subjects were assessed by two reviewers who were blinded to the scanning system used. RESULTS: Twenty-two eyes were excluded due to poor image quality (17 eyes from Triton, 4 eyes from PLEXElite, and 1 eye from both instruments, P = 0.003). A final 38 eyes from 23 subjects were eligible for analysis. Each binarization method and instrument led to different median values. The coefficients of variation for vessel density measurements ranged from 0.3% to 2.3% and 0.6% to 4.7% for the PLEXElite and Triton, respectively. Local adaptive thresholding methods revealed higher reproducibility than did global thresholding methods for both devices. CONCLUSIONS: Macular scans with both SS-OCTA instruments showed good reproducibility for vessel density measurements. PLEXElite recorded fewer poor images and had higher reproducibility than did Triton. These findings will inform the selection of proper binarization methods for the clinical detection of vascular diseases affecting the central retina. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: The reproducibility for macular vessel measurements with SS-OCTA instruments was good. PLEXElite recorded fewer poor images and had higher reproducibility than did Triton.