[optimal] Re: Subpar Zeiss Clarus AF Images

  • From: "Brice Critser" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> ("bricecritser")
  • To: optimal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 13:45:40 -0600

This is a common Clarus artifact based on the way the optics are assembled. Try taking a far peripheral field and you’ll see it exaggerated. Maybe someone from Zeiss can comment if they’re on Optimal. 

Brice Critser, CRA, OCT-C, FOPSResearch Specialist Institute for Vision Research University of Iowa

On Dec 17, 2021, at 1:27 PM, Keth, Christopher <Christopher.Keth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:



That’s weird, almost looks like newton rings. I assume you’ve tried artificial tears to give the smoothest optical surface you can get?

 

 

Chris Keth, CRA, OCT-C

UNC Kittner Eye Center

 

 

 

From: optimal-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <optimal-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Cunningham Denise[E]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2021 2:09 PM
To: optimal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [optimal] Re: Subpar Zeiss Clarus AF Images

 

 External Email: If this message seems suspicious in any way, exercise caution before opening attachments or clicking on links.  

All of our patients are well dilated. Today’s two patients were both phakic.

 

From: optimal-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <optimal-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2021 1:17 PM
To: 'optimal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx' <optimal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [optimal] Re: Subpar Zeiss Clarus AF Images

 

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are confident the content is safe.

 

Can you give us a little more information? Is it happening with all patients across the board? Dilated, undilated? Both phakic and pseudo-?

 

 

Chris Keth, CRA, OCT-C

UNC Kittner Eye Center

 

 

 

From: optimal-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <optimal-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Cunningham Denise[E]
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2021 1:03 PM
To: optimal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [optimal] Subpar Zeiss Clarus AF Images

 

 External Email: If this message seems suspicious in any way, exercise caution before opening attachments or clicking on links.  

We are slowly learning to use the Clarus 500. The color images are superb and typically without artifacts.

 

The green FAF images, however, are not up to par as almost every picture displays a series of dark concentric rings in the periphery along with uneven illumination, nasally and temporally.

 

Because of our relative inexperience with this instrument, we don’t know if the cause is operator, patient, or equipment related. What do you think? How can we eliminate these unwanted artifacts.

 

Denise

 

 

 

 

----- Confidentiality Notice -----
The information contained in (or attached to) this electronic message may be legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the message.

JPEG image

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. optimal
  3. Archive
  4. 12-2021