PURPOSE: To compare optical coherence tomography (OCT) and scanning laser polarimetry (GDx) measurements of the retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients with and without optic neuritis (ON). METHODS: OCT and GDx were performed on 68 MS patients. Qualifying eyes were divided into two groups: 51 eyes with an ON history > or =6 months before (ON eyes) and 65 eyes with no history of ON (non-ON eyes). Several GDx and OCT parameters and criteria were used to define an eye as abnormal, for example, GDx nerve fiber indicator (NFI) >20 or 30, OCT average RNFL thickness, and GDx temporal-superior-nasal-inferior-temporal average (TSNIT) below 5 or 1% of the normative database of the instruments. Agreement between OCT and GDx parameters was reported as percent of observed agreement, along with the AC1 statistic. Linear regression analyses were used to examine the relationship between OCT average RNFL thickness and GDx NFI and TSNIT. RESULTS: All OCT and GDx measurements showed significantly more RNFL damage in ON than in non-ON eyes. Agreement between OCT and GDx parameters ranged from 69 to 90% (AC1 0.37 to 0.81) in ON eyes and 52 to 91% (AC1 = 0.21 to 0.90) in non-ON eyes. Best agreement was observed between OCT average RNFL thickness (p < 0.01) and NFI (>30) in ON eyes (90%, AC1 = 0.81) and between OCT average RNFL thickness (p < 0.01) and GDx TSNIT average (p < 0.01) in non-ON eyes (91%, AC1 = 0.90). In ON eyes, the OCT average RNFL thickness showed good linear correlation with NFI (R = 0.69, p < 0.0001) and TSNIT (R = 0.55, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: OCT and GDx show good agreement and can be useful in detecting RNFL loss in MS/ON eyes.
PURPOSE: To compare optical coherence tomography (OCT) and scanning laser polarimetry (GDx) measurements of the retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients with and without optic neuritis (ON). METHODS: OCT and GDx were performed on 68 MS patients. Qualifying eyes were divided into two groups: 51 eyes with an ON history > or =6 months before (ON eyes) and 65 eyes with no history of ON (non-ON eyes). Several GDx and OCT parameters and criteria were used to define an eye as abnormal, for example, GDx nerve fiber indicator (NFI) >20 or 30, OCT average RNFL thickness, and GDx temporal-superior-nasal-inferior-temporal average (TSNIT) below 5 or 1% of the normative database of the instruments. Agreement between OCT and GDx parameters was reported as percent of observed agreement, along with the AC1 statistic. Linear regression analyses were used to examine the relationship between OCT average RNFL thickness and GDx NFI and TSNIT. RESULTS: All OCT and GDx measurements showed significantly more RNFL damage in ON than in non-ON eyes. Agreement between OCT and GDx parameters ranged from 69 to 90% (AC1 0.37 to 0.81) in ON eyes and 52 to 91% (AC1 = 0.21 to 0.90) in non-ON eyes. Best agreement was observed between OCT average RNFL thickness (p < 0.01) and NFI (>30) in ON eyes (90%, AC1 = 0.81) and between OCT average RNFL thickness (p < 0.01) and GDxTSNIT average (p < 0.01) in non-ON eyes (91%, AC1 = 0.90). In ON eyes, the OCT average RNFL thickness showed good linear correlation with NFI (R = 0.69, p < 0.0001) and TSNIT (R = 0.55, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: OCT and GDx show good agreement and can be useful in detecting RNFL loss in MS/ON eyes.
Authors: Samin Hong; Hyunseok Ahn; Seung Joo Ha; Ho Yeop Yeom; Gong Je Seong; Young Jae Hong Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: C Bowd; L M Zangwill; C C Berry; E Z Blumenthal; C Vasile; C Sanchez-Galeana; C F Bosworth; P A Sample; R N Weinreb Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2001-08 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Fiona Costello; Stuart Coupland; William Hodge; Gianni R Lorello; Jeannie Koroluk; Y Irene Pan; Mark S Freedman; David H Zackon; Randy H Kardon Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Victoria Pueyo; Jose Ramon Ara; Carmen Almarcegui; Jesus Martin; Noemi Güerri; Elena García; Luis Emilio Pablo; Francisco Manuel Honrubia; Francisco Javier Fernandez Journal: Acta Ophthalmol Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 3.761