Quantitative Comparison of a Handheld and a Table-Top Fundus Camera for Retinal Microvascular Assessment

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare a widely applied table-top digital non-mydriatic camera (Topcon TRC-NW-8) with a handheld digital non-mydriatic camera (Optomed Aurora IQ) regarding the quantitative assessment of the retinal microcirculation using established biomarkers: central retinal arteriolar equivalent (CRAE), central retinal venular equivalent (CRVE) and arterio-venous ratio (AVR). Methods: The present cross-sectional study included 26 randomly selected participants (51 eyes) who underwent retinal imaging of both eyes with the two devices and were analyzed using a static retinal vessel analyzer. Results: The mean differences in CRAE, CRVE and AVR between the two devices (Topcon/Aurora) were 24.96 ± 11.7, 22.7 ± 11.7 and 0.026 ± 0.045, respectively. Strong correlations were observed between devices (r = 0.84 for CRAE, 0.75 for CRVE and 0.83 for AVR; all p < 0.001), with high agreement as indicated by ICC values (0.91, 0.85, and 0.90, respectively). Bland–Altman plots indicated evidence of systemic bias (95% within 2 SD) with no proportional bias, as the differences were consistently distributed across the range of average values. Regression-based equations were derived to approximate the transformation of measurements between devices. Conclusions: The handheld fundus camera demonstrates strong correlation and good relative agreement with the table-top device; however, a consistent device-dependent bias limits the direct interchangeability of absolute measurements. The derived transformation equations may facilitate approximate cross-device comparison, although external validation is required. These findings support the complementary use of handheld devices and highlight the need for calibration strategies when integrating measurements across platforms.