Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Keywords
- retinopathy of prematurity (2) (remove)
Institute
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Augenheilkunde (2) (remove)
Publisher
- BMJ Publishing Group (1)
- Wiley (1)
Purpose
The German Retina.net ROP registry and its Europe-wide successor, the EU-ROP registry, collect data from patients treated for ROP. This analysis compares input parameters of these two registries to establish a procedure for joint analyses of different registry data using exemplary datasets from the two registries.
Methods
Exemplary datasets from the two databases over a 1-year period each (German Retina.net ROP Registry, 2011, 22 infants; EU-ROP Registry, 2021, 44 infants) were compared. The parameters documented in the two databases were aligned and analysed regarding demographic parameters, treatment modalities, complications within first 24 h and retreatments.
Results
The current analysis showed that data can be aligned for joint analyses with some adjustments within the data structure. The registry with more detailed data collection (EU-ROP) needs to be reduced regarding granularity in order to align the different registries, as the registry with lower granularity determines the level of analyses that can be performed in a comparative approach. In the exemplary datasets, we observed that the overall most common ROP severity in both registries was zone II, 3+ (2011: 70.5%; 2021: 65%), with decreasing numbers of clock hours showing preretinal neovascularisations (2011: 10–12 clock hours in 29% of cases, 2021: 4–6 clock hours in 38%). The most prevalent treatment method was laser coagulation in 2011 (75%) and anti-VEGF therapy in 2021 (86.1%). Within the anti-VEGF group, all patients were treated with bevacizumab in 2011 and with ranibizumab in 2021. Retreatment rates were comparable in 2011 and 2021.
Conclusion
Data from two different ROP registries can be aligned and jointly analysed. The analysis reveals a paradigm shift in treatment modalities, from predominantly laser to anti-VEGF, and within the anti-VEGF group from bevacizumab to ranibizumab in Germany. In addition, there was a trend towards earlier treatment in 2021.
Background/Aims
Prematurely born infants undergo costly, stressful eye examinations to uncover the small fraction with retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) that needs treatment to prevent blindness. The aim was to develop a prediction tool (DIGIROP-Screen) with 100% sensitivity and high specificity to safely reduce screening of those infants not needing treatment. DIGIROP-Screen was compared with four other ROP models based on longitudinal weights.
Methods
Data, including infants born at 24–30 weeks of gestational age (GA), for DIGIROP-Screen development (DevGroup, N=6991) originate from the Swedish National Registry for ROP. Three international cohorts comprised the external validation groups (ValGroups, N=1241). Multivariable logistic regressions, over postnatal ages (PNAs) 6–14 weeks, were validated. Predictors were birth characteristics, status and age at first diagnosed ROP and essential interactions.
Results
ROP treatment was required in 287 (4.1%)/6991 infants in DevGroup and 49 (3.9%)/1241 in ValGroups. To allow 100% sensitivity in DevGroup, specificity at birth was 53.1% and cumulatively 60.5% at PNA 8 weeks. Applying the same cut-offs in ValGroups, specificities were similar (46.3% and 53.5%). One infant with severe malformations in ValGroups was incorrectly classified as not needing screening. For all other infants, at PNA 6–14 weeks, sensitivity was 100%. In other published models, sensitivity ranged from 88.5% to 100% and specificity ranged from 9.6% to 45.2%.
Conclusions
DIGIROP-Screen, a clinical decision support tool using readily available birth and ROP screening data for infants born GA 24–30 weeks, in the European and North American populations tested can safely identify infants not needing ROP screening. DIGIROP-Screen had equal or higher sensitivity and specificity compared with other models. DIGIROP-Screen should be tested in any new cohort for validation and if not validated it can be modified using the same statistical approaches applied to a specific clinical setting.