J G Crowston1, C R Hopley, P R Healey, A Lee, P Mitchell. 1. Centre for Vision Research, Department of Ophthalmology, Westmead Millennium and Save Sight Institutes, University of Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The 97.5th percentile for vertical cup to disc ratio (VCDR) has been proposed as a useful tool to assist in the diagnosis of glaucoma in population studies. Previous reports of VCDR percentiles have either not been adjusted for disc size or have been calculated by regression analysis from small hospital based cohorts. The authors' aim was to generate VCDR percentiles in a large, population based sample. METHODS: Data were collected from 3654 individuals, aged 49 years or older, living in the Blue Mountains, west of Sydney. Vertical disc diameter and VCDR were determined by planimetry from stereo optic disc photographs. The distribution of VCDR and percentiles (95th, 97.5th, 99th) were calculated. RESULTS: 6678 eyes were included in the analysis. Median cup to disc ratio, 95th, 97.5th, and 99th percentile increased with vertical optic disc diameter in a linear fashion. An increase of 0.2 in median VCDR (0.35 to 0.55) was observed between small (1.1-1.3 mm) and large (1.8-2.0 mm) optic discs. An equivalent increase of 0.2 (0.59 to 0.74) was observed for the 97.5th percentile from small to large discs. CONCLUSION: VCDR percentiles for a "normal" population, adjusted for vertical optic disc diameter are presented. One quarter of all discs fell within the small or large disc categories highlighting the importance for estimating optic disc size. These data may assist in the diagnosis of glaucoma in clinical practice as well as providing a normative database. Sole use of VCDR percentile cut offs in defining glaucoma cases in population surveys requires further validation.
OBJECTIVE: The 97.5th percentile for vertical cup to disc ratio (VCDR) has been proposed as a useful tool to assist in the diagnosis of glaucoma in population studies. Previous reports of VCDR percentiles have either not been adjusted for disc size or have been calculated by regression analysis from small hospital based cohorts. The authors' aim was to generate VCDR percentiles in a large, population based sample. METHODS: Data were collected from 3654 individuals, aged 49 years or older, living in the Blue Mountains, west of Sydney. Vertical disc diameter and VCDR were determined by planimetry from stereo optic disc photographs. The distribution of VCDR and percentiles (95th, 97.5th, 99th) were calculated. RESULTS: 6678 eyes were included in the analysis. Median cup to disc ratio, 95th, 97.5th, and 99th percentile increased with vertical optic disc diameter in a linear fashion. An increase of 0.2 in median VCDR (0.35 to 0.55) was observed between small (1.1-1.3 mm) and large (1.8-2.0 mm) optic discs. An equivalent increase of 0.2 (0.59 to 0.74) was observed for the 97.5th percentile from small to large discs. CONCLUSION: VCDR percentiles for a "normal" population, adjusted for vertical optic disc diameter are presented. One quarter of all discs fell within the small or large disc categories highlighting the importance for estimating optic disc size. These data may assist in the diagnosis of glaucoma in clinical practice as well as providing a normative database. Sole use of VCDR percentile cut offs in defining glaucoma cases in population surveys requires further validation.
Authors: Lilian Hui Li Koh; Muhammad Amir Ismail; Sae Cheong Yap; Elizabeth Poh Ying Wong; Leonard Wei Leon Yip Journal: Int J Ophthalmol Date: 2016-08-18 Impact factor: 1.779
Authors: Evelyn C O'Neill; Helen V Danesh-Meyer; Paul P Connell; Ian A Trounce; Michael A Coote; David A Mackey; Jonathan G Crowston Journal: Nat Rev Neurol Date: 2010-03-09 Impact factor: 42.937
Authors: Chiu-Fang Chou; Mary Frances Cotch; Susan Vitale; Xinzhi Zhang; Ronald Klein; David S Friedman; Barbara E K Klein; Jinan B Saaddine Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2013-07 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Michael I Seider; Roland Y Lee; Dandan Wang; Melike Pekmezci; Travis C Porco; Shan C Lin Journal: J Glaucoma Date: 2009 Oct-Nov Impact factor: 2.503