Literature DB >> 17035283

Accuracy of GDx VCC, HRT I, and clinical assessment of stereoscopic optic nerve head photographs for diagnosing glaucoma.

Nicolaas J Reus1, Maartje de Graaf, Hans G Lemij.   

Abstract

AIMS: To determine and compare the accuracy and reproducibility of GDx variable cornea compensation (VCC) scanning laser polarimetry (SLP) with VCC, Heidelberg retina tomograph (HRT) I confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (CSLO), and clinical assessment of stereoscopic optic nerve head (ONH) photographs for diagnosing glaucoma.
METHODS: One eye each of 40 healthy subjects, 48 glaucoma patients, and six patients with ocular hypertension were measured with SLP-VCC and CSLO. Simultaneous stereoscopic ONH photographs were also obtained. Sixteen photographs of healthy and glaucomatous eyes were duplicated for assessing intraobserver agreement. Four glaucoma specialists, four general ophthalmologists, four residents in ophthalmology, and four optometrists classified the ONH photographs as normal or glaucomatous. For SLP-VCC, the nerve fiber indicator (NFI) was evaluated. For CSLO, the Moorfields regression analysis (MRA) and the Bathija linear discriminant function (LDF) were used. Sensitivity, specificity, percentage of correctly classified eyes, and intra- and interobserver agreement, expressed as kappa (kappa) were calculated.
RESULTS: SLP-VCC had the highest diagnostic accuracy, with a sensitivity, specificity, and overall correct classification of 91.7%, 95.0% and 93.2%, respectively. CSLO, expressed as Bathija LDF and MRA, had a diagnostic accuracy comparable to glaucoma specialists and general ophthalmologists with an overall accuracy of 89.8%, 86.4%, 86.7% and 85.2%, respectively. Residents classified the fewest eyes correctly. Intraobserver agreement for classifying the ONH photographs ranged between 0.48 (within residents) and 0.78 (within glaucoma specialists). The interobserver agreement ranged between 0.45 (between residents) and 0.74 (between glaucoma specialists). The agreement between observers and CSLO MRA (kappa, 0.68) was statistically significantly higher (p<0.001; paired t-test) than between observers and SLP-VCC NFI (kappa, 0.60) and CSLO Bathija LDF (kappa, 0.62).
CONCLUSION: Automated analysis of measurements with GDx VCC and HRT had a similar diagnostic accuracy for glaucoma as classification of stereoscopic ONH photographs by glaucoma specialists, thus bringing all eye-care professionals to this desirable level. The intra- and interobserver agreement for ONH analysis was only moderate to good. We think these imaging techniques may assist clinicians in diagnosing glaucoma.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17035283      PMCID: PMC1857667          DOI: 10.1136/bjo.2006.096586

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0007-1161            Impact factor:   4.638


  12 in total

1.  Comparison of optic nerve imaging methods to distinguish normal eyes from those with glaucoma.

Authors:  Michael J Greaney; Douglas C Hoffman; David F Garway-Heath; Mamdouh Nakla; Anne L Coleman; Joseph Caprioli
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 4.799

2.  Identifying early glaucomatous changes. Comparison between expert clinical assessment of optic disc photographs and confocal scanning ophthalmoscopy.

Authors:  G Wollstein; D F Garway-Heath; L Fontana; R A Hitchings
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 12.079

3.  Expert agreement in evaluating the optic disc for glaucoma.

Authors:  R Varma; W C Steinmann; I U Scott
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1992-02       Impact factor: 12.079

4.  Quantitative assessment of the optic nerve head with the laser tomographic scanner.

Authors:  R N Weinreb; A W Dreher; J F Bille
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  1989-01       Impact factor: 2.031

5.  Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach.

Authors:  E R DeLong; D M DeLong; D L Clarke-Pearson
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Comparison of data analysis tools for detection of glaucoma with the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph.

Authors:  Bryce A Ford; Paul H Artes; Terry A McCormick; Marcelo T Nicolela; Raymond P LeBlanc; Balwantray C Chauhan
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 12.079

7.  Comparison of the GDx VCC scanning laser polarimeter, HRT II confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope, and stratus OCT optical coherence tomograph for the detection of glaucoma.

Authors:  Felipe A Medeiros; Linda M Zangwill; Christopher Bowd; Robert N Weinreb
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-06

8.  Agreement among optometrists, ophthalmologists, and residents in evaluating the optic disc for glaucoma.

Authors:  L S Abrams; I U Scott; G L Spaeth; H A Quigley; R Varma
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 12.079

9.  Diagnostic accuracy of the GDx VCC for glaucoma.

Authors:  Nicolaas J Reus; Hans G Lemij
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 12.079

10.  Subjective and objective optic nerve assessment in African Americans and whites.

Authors:  Christopher A Girkin; Gerald McGwin; Cherie Long; Julio DeLeon-Ortega; Curtis M Graf; Andrew W Everett
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 4.799

View more
  18 in total

1.  Glaucomatous progression in series of stereoscopic photographs and Heidelberg retina tomograph images.

Authors:  Neil O'Leary; David P Crabb; Steven L Mansberger; Brad Fortune; Michael D Twa; Michael J Lloyd; Aachal Kotecha; David F Garway-Heath; George A Cioffi; Chris A Johnson
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-05

2.  Utility of digital stereo images for optic disc evaluation.

Authors:  Richard A Stone; Gui-Shuang Ying; Denise J Pearson; Mayank Bansal; Manika Puri; Eydie Miller; Judith Alexander; Jody Piltz-Seymour; William Nyberg; Maureen G Maguire; Jayan Eledath; Harpreet Sawhney
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2010-05-26       Impact factor: 4.799

3.  How should diagnostic tests be evaluated in glaucoma?

Authors:  Felipe A Medeiros
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 4.638

4.  Normative Databases for Imaging Instrumentation.

Authors:  Tony Realini; Linda M Zangwill; John G Flanagan; David Garway-Heath; Vincent M Patella; Chris A Johnson; Paul H Artes; Ian B Gaddie; Murray Fingeret
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 2.503

5.  Comparison of retinal nerve fiber layer and optic disc imaging for diagnosing glaucoma in patients suspected of having the disease.

Authors:  Felipe A Medeiros; Gianmarco Vizzeri; Linda M Zangwill; Luciana M Alencar; Pamela A Sample; Robert N Weinreb
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2008-01-22       Impact factor: 12.079

Review 6.  Optic nerve head and fibre layer imaging for diagnosing glaucoma.

Authors:  Manuele Michelessi; Ersilia Lucenteforte; Francesco Oddone; Miriam Brazzelli; Mariacristina Parravano; Sara Franchi; Sueko M Ng; Gianni Virgili
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-11-30

Review 7.  [Clinical evaluation of the optic disc in glaucoma].

Authors:  R Greslechner; D Spiegel
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 1.059

8.  Structural and Functional Progression in the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial.

Authors:  HannaMaria Öhnell; Anders Heijl; Lena Brenner; Harald Anderson; Boel Bengtsson
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2016-03-02       Impact factor: 12.079

Review 9.  Diagnostic tools for glaucoma detection and management.

Authors:  Pooja Sharma; Pamela A Sample; Linda M Zangwill; Joel S Schuman
Journal:  Surv Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 6.048

10.  Enhanced detection of open-angle glaucoma with an anatomically accurate optical coherence tomography-derived neuroretinal rim parameter.

Authors:  Balwantray C Chauhan; Neil O'Leary; Faisal A AlMobarak; Alexandre S C Reis; Hongli Yang; Glen P Sharpe; Donna M Hutchison; Marcelo T Nicolela; Claude F Burgoyne
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2012-12-23       Impact factor: 12.079

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.