Assessment of Anterior Segment Tumors with Ultrasound Biomicroscopy versus Anterior Segment Optical Coherence Tomography in 200 Cases

Purpose To compare ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM) versus anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) for imaging of tumors of the anterior segment of the eye. Design Retrospective, noninterventional case series. Participants We included 200 patients. Methods Review of medical records of patients who underwent both UBM and AS-OCT for evaluation of anterior segment tumors. Main Outcome Measures Comparison of tumor surface and internal visualization. Results There were 200 eyes with anterior segment tumors involving the iris stroma in 96 (48%), ciliary body in 14 (7%), combined iris and ciliary body in 32 (16%), iris pigment epithelium (IPE) in 44 (22%), conjunctiva in 6 (3%), sclera in 4 (2%), and others in 6 (1% each). The diagnoses included nevus in 75 eyes (38%), melanoma in 47 (24%), cyst in 48 (24%), epithelioma (adenoma) in 5 (3%), metastasis, melanocytosis and melanocytoma in 4 eyes each (2%), and others (1% each). Image analysis (UBM vs AS-OCT) revealed adequate visualization of all tumor margins (189 [95%] vs 80 [40%]), posterior tumor shadowing (9 [5%] vs 144 [72%]), and high overall image quality (159 [80%] vs 136 [68%]). Comparison for better image resolution (UBM vs AS-OCT) disclosed UBM provided better overall tumor visualization (138 [69%] vs 62 [31%]) and better resolution of the posterior margin (147 [74%] vs 53 [27%]), whereas AS-OCT provided better resolution of the anterior margin (40 [20%] vs 160 [80%]) as well as better overall resolution of anterior segment anatomy (41 [21%] vs 159 [80%]). Better resolution was found with UBM for pigmented tumors (n = 162; 107 [66%] vs 55 [34%]) as well as for nonpigmented tumors (n = 38; 23 [61%] vs 15 [39%]). Regarding location, iris tumor resolution was similar with each technique (49 [52%] vs 45 [48%]). Conclusions For anterior segment tumors, UBM offers better visualization of the posterior margin and provides overall better images for entire tumor configuration compared with AS-OCT. Financial Disclosure(s) The authors have no proprietary or commercial interest in any of the materials discussed in this article. To compare ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM) versus anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) for imaging of tumors of the anterior segment of the eye. Retrospective, noninterventional case series. We included 200 patients. Review of medical records of patients who underwent both UBM and AS-OCT for evaluation of anterior segment tumors. Comparison of tumor surface and internal visualization. There were 200 eyes with anterior segment tumors involving the iris stroma in 96 (48%), ciliary body in 14 (7%), combined iris and ciliary body in 32 (16%), iris pigment epithelium (IPE) in 44 (22%), conjunctiva in 6 (3%), sclera in 4 (2%), and others in 6 (1% each). The diagnoses included nevus in 75 eyes (38%), melanoma in 47 (24%), cyst in 48 (24%), epithelioma (adenoma) in 5 (3%), metastasis, melanocytosis and melanocytoma in 4 eyes each (2%), and others (1% each). Image analysis (UBM vs AS-OCT) revealed adequate visualization of all tumor margins (189 [95%] vs 80 [40%]), posterior tumor shadowing (9 [5%] vs 144 [72%]), and high overall image quality (159 [80%] vs 136 [68%]). Comparison for better image resolution (UBM vs AS-OCT) disclosed UBM provided better overall tumor visualization (138 [69%] vs 62 [31%]) and better resolution of the posterior margin (147 [74%] vs 53 [27%]), whereas AS-OCT provided better resolution of the anterior margin (40 [20%] vs 160 [80%]) as well as better overall resolution of anterior segment anatomy (41 [21%] vs 159 [80%]). Better resolution was found with UBM for pigmented tumors (n = 162; 107 [66%] vs 55 [34%]) as well as for nonpigmented tumors (n = 38; 23 [61%] vs 15 [39%]). Regarding location, iris tumor resolution was similar with each technique (49 [52%] vs 45 [48%]). For anterior segment tumors, UBM offers better visualization of the posterior margin and provides overall better images for entire tumor configuration compared with AS-OCT.