Literature DB >> 11438054

Interobserver variability of optic disk variables measured by confocal scanning laser tomography.

M Iester1, F S Mikelberg, P Courtright, R O Burk, J Caprioli, J B Jonas, R N Weinreb, L Zangwill.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the interobserver variation of confocal laser scanning tomographic measurements of the optic nerve head and to address the question of whether the addition of clinical optic disk photographs is helpful in outlining the optic disk margin and in reducing the observer-related variation of the measurements. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Optic disk variables for 16 eyes of 16 patients with glaucoma, generated by confocal laser scanning laser tomography (Heidelberg Retina Tomograph), were independently evaluated by four experienced glaucoma specialists, and the interobserver variability was calculated. A second separate review by the same observers included the use of clinical stereoscopic color optic nerve head photographs to aid definition of the optic disk margin.
RESULTS: Optic disk parameters with the smallest interobserver variation were cup shape measure, maximum cup depth, height variation contour, and mean height contour. The intraobserver variation of these parameters did not increase when clinical optic disk slides were additionally available. Parameters with the highest interobserver variation were volume below surface, volume below reference, volume above surface, and volume above reference. The observer variation of these optic disk parameters increased significantly for two of the four examiners when clinical optic disk slides were additionally available for outlining the optic disk margin.
CONCLUSION: Confocal laser scanning tomography of the optic nerve head can be improved significantly if clinical optic disk photographs are additionally available to help in outlining the optic disk margin. Because interobserver variation in the tomographic optic disk measurements can be significant, even if experienced observer are involved, tomographic optic disk measurements may be centralized in reading centers in the case of multicenter studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11438054     DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9394(01)00938-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0002-9394            Impact factor:   5.258


  18 in total

1.  Comparison of long-term fluctuations: laser scanning tomography versus automated perimetry.

Authors:  Jens Funk; Heiko Mueller
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2003-08-29       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Ten-year results: detection of long-term progressive optic disc changes with confocal laser tomography.

Authors:  Heiko Philippin; Anke Unsoeld; Philip Maier; Sebastian Walter; Michael Bach; Jens Funk
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2005-08-25       Impact factor: 3.117

3.  Interobserver variability in confocal optic nerve analysis (HRT).

Authors:  Manuel M Hermann; David F Garway-Heath; Christian P Jonescu-Cuypers; Reinhard O W Burk; Jost B Jonas; Christian Y Mardin; Jens Funk; Michael Diestelhorst
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2007-02-06       Impact factor: 2.031

4.  Detection of glaucoma using operator-dependent versus operator-independent classification in the Heidelberg retinal tomograph-III.

Authors:  N Harizman; J R Zelefsky; E Ilitchev; C Tello; R Ritch; J M Liebmann
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-07-26       Impact factor: 4.638

5.  Comparison of Heidelberg Retina Tomograph-3 glaucoma probability score and Moorfields regression analysis of optic nerve head in glaucoma patients and healthy individuals.

Authors:  Çagatay Caglar; Adem Gul; Muhammed Batur; Tekin Yasar
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-10-14       Impact factor: 3.117

6.  Glaucoma detection with the Heidelberg retina tomograph 3.

Authors:  Zvia Burgansky-Eliash; Gadi Wollstein; Richard A Bilonick; Hiroshi Ishikawa; Larry Kagemann; Joel S Schuman
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2006-11-30       Impact factor: 12.079

Review 7.  [Glaucoma diagnosis and follow-up using the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph].

Authors:  E M Hoffmann; J Lamparter; T Schmidt; A Schulze
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 1.059

8.  Heidelberg Retina Tomograph 3 machine learning classifiers for glaucoma detection.

Authors:  K A Townsend; G Wollstein; D Danks; K R Sung; H Ishikawa; L Kagemann; M L Gabriele; J S Schuman
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 4.638

9.  Intraobserver variability of confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy with and without stereo photographs.

Authors:  H T Nguyen; K P Pikey; S K Gardiner; D Gritz; R Krishnadas; G A Cioffi; S L Mansberger
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.638

10.  Comparison of HRT-3 glaucoma probability score and subjective stereophotograph assessment for prediction of progression in glaucoma.

Authors:  Luciana M Alencar; Christopher Bowd; Robert N Weinreb; Linda M Zangwill; Pamela A Sample; Felipe A Medeiros
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 4.799

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.