Ophthalmol Retina

PURPOSE: To develop a consensus nomenclature for optical coherence tomography angiography (OCTA) findings in retinal vascular diseases. DESIGN: Online survey using Delphi Method SUBJECTS, PARTICIPANTS AND/OR CONTROLS: Members of The Retina Society, European Society of Retina Specialists (EURETINA) and the Japanese Retina and Vitreous Society (JRVS). METHODS, INTERVENTION, OR TESTING: An online questionnaire on OCTA terminology in retinal vascular diseases was sent to members of The Retina Society, EURETINA and the JRVS. The respondents were divided into two groups (experts vs users) based on the number of their publications in this field. The respondents who had more than 5 publications in the field of OCTA and retinal vascular diseases were considered the OCTA "experts" group MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Consensus and near-consensus on OCTA nomenclature RESULTS: The complete responses of 85 retina specialists were included in the analysis. Thirty-one were categorized as "experts". There was a consensus in both groups that OCTA parameters such as foveal avascular zone (FAZ) parameters, areas of nonperfusion and presence of neovascularization (NV) should be implemented in the identification and staging of DR and that OCTA can be applied to differentiate between ischemic vs. non ischemic retinal vein occlusion. Diabetic macular ischemia (DMI) can be also assessed via OCTA. Further, there was consensus that the terminology should differ based on the underlying causes of decreased vascular flow signal. There was disagreement in other areas, such as which terms should be applied to describe decreased OCTA signal from different causes, the Definition of widefield OCTA and how to quantify DMI and area of decreased flow signal. These discrepancies form the basis for the upcoming expert Delphi rounds that aim to develop a standardized OCTA nomenclature. CONCLUSIONS: While there was agreement in some areas, significant differences were found in many areas of OCTA terminology among all respondents, but also between the "expert" and "user" groups. This indicates the need for standardization of the nomenclature among all specialists in the field of retinal vascular diseases