
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
<title>Infrared Autofluorescence (IRAF) Imaging</title>
<link>https://www.opsweb.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1721078</link>
<description></description>
<lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 Jul 2026 01:53:23 GMT</lastBuildDate>
<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2023 13:05:26 GMT</pubDate>
<copyright>Copyright &#xA9; 2023 Ophthalmic Photographers&apos; Society</copyright>
<atom:link href="https://www.opsweb.org/forums/topic_rss.asp?id=1721078" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link>
<item>
<title>Infrared Autofluorescence (IRAF) Imaging</title>
<link>https://www.opsweb.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1721078</link>
<guid>https://www.opsweb.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1721078</guid>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Hi everyone,</p><p>So, I saw a few articles recently referencing IRAF imaging in addition to standard Blue FAF.&nbsp;</p><p>I hadn't seen anything about IRAF before, and wanted to know if anyone here had any practical experience with it and what it's use would be in a clinic setting. Most of the references to it that I've been able to find were scholarly articles, which weren't a lot of help.</p><p>Thanks for the help!</p>]]></description>
<pubDate>Wed, 4 Jan 2023 19:35:52 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://www.opsweb.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1721116</link>
<guid>https://www.opsweb.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1721116</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Think of the near infrared light used for ICG, it's near infrared, now using the barrier filter and without ICG take a picture.  Choroidal areas of hyperfluorescence show on IRAF, and because it's IR it doesn't bother the patient to capture on most systems.  I say most because the Clarus still uses a bright visible light and best I figure filters out what is received into the IRAF image.  Interesting note on that with the clarus, many times the IRAF image I take with it is a higher quality than the BAF image I take with it]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 5 Jan 2023 02:41:44 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://www.opsweb.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1721134</link>
<guid>https://www.opsweb.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1721134</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Thanks for the info Paul. It seems to be roughly the same quality on our Spectralis system. I was testing it out a bit yesterday.<br />Any particular diagnoses that IRAF helps to check for? Or would it fall in to generally the same category as BAF?<br />The main ones I saw online were in checking for Retinitis Pigmentosa. ]]></description>
<pubDate>Thu, 5 Jan 2023 15:20:17 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title></title>
<link>https://www.opsweb.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1723946</link>
<guid>https://www.opsweb.org/forums/posts.aspx?topic=1723946</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Some forms of AMD really show well, I think when there's a true CNVM it shows really nice and compliments an OCT-A.  I haven't really tried IRAF with RP but there's a good chance that it would show something differently than BAF would.  With the Clarus the IRAF almost come out with a better image more akin to the BAF on the Spectralis rather than what I feel is usually an overly washed out version of a BAF.  <br /><br />Honestly I think anything choroidal or closer to RPE would be more prominent in it, so things like Stargardts, Choroidal Hemangioma, Choroidal Melanoma, maybe even CHRPE lesions, etc.]]></description>
<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2023 14:05:26 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
