Prof. Giovanni Staurenghi is Professor of Ophthalmology, Chairman Eye Clinic, Department of Clinical Science Luigi Sacco, Sacco Hospital, University of Milan. Prof. Giovanni Staurenghi, another leading proponent of SLO technology, compared the performance of the new generation compact SLO device, EasyScan, with a traditional fundus camera. “We sought to replicate a normal clinical set-up to see if it is possible to use EasyScan in a general clinical practice,” he explained. The evaluation parameters were (1) the quality of the retinal scan and (2) the number of different types of disease Staurenghi and his team could identify using each system.
Prof. Staurenghi is known for his interest in new retinal imaging technologies and techniques and admits to favouring SLO technology. “I am a little bit biased,” he said, “but the advantages of SLO are clear. The first is that you are able to identify things better because of the precision of being able to scan through a small pupil [as small as 2 mm in diameter compared to 3–4 mm for a regular fundus camera] point-by-point, without mydriasis. The second advantage of SLO is that the contrast and resolution are better and that can obviously be very useful for identifying different types of retinal pathologies, for diabetic retinopathy, for example, or a macular hole.”
For the EasyScan evaluation, Prof. Staurenghi and his team collected 70 sets and compared them on both the new SLO machine and a traditional fundus camera. The evaluation included non-mydriatic comparisons using both devices and a number of mydriatic fundus versus non-mydriatic SLO scans in more unusual or potentially complex cases. “The evaluation of the data confirmed what we expected: we see the same main advantages over fundus with the EasyScan as we do with other SLO devices,” added Prof. Staurenghi. “The core of the machine is a little bit different from other SLO machines because it is aimed at mainstream users rather than retinal specialists, and so doesn’t offer full-color SLO imaging, but it is probably the best there is outside autofluorescence imaging, and it is a really portable instrument. It does everything a clinician needs and the use of infrared light is not disturbing for the patient — not like the flash of a fundus camera. That is another big advantage. It is easy to create nice images with almost every patient, with good details and no problems.”