Literature DB >> 21037499

Agreement between the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph (HRT) stereometric parameters estimated using HRT-I and HRT-II.

Madhusudhanan Balasubramanian1, Christopher Bowd, Robert N Weinreb, Linda M Zangwill.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess agreement between Heidelberg Retina Tomograph (HRT)-I and HRT-II stereometric parameters and to determine whether parabolic error correction (PEC) to the topographies improves agreement.
METHODS: University of California San Diego Diagnostic Innovations in Glaucoma Study participants with two HRT-II examinations (n = 380) or one HRT-I and one HRT-II examinations (n = 344) acquired on the same day were included. From the group of 380 eyes, 200 eyes were randomly selected to estimate the repeatability coefficients of HRT-II rim area and volume, cup area and volume, and mean retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness parameters (HRT-II control group), and the remaining 180 eyes were used to assess agreement between two HRT-II examinations (HRT-II study group). Agreement between stereometric parameters of HRT-I and HRT-II examinations (HRT-I vs. HRT-II study group) were assessed with (1) no PEC, (2) HRT PEC, and (3) a modified PEC. Bland-Altman plots were used to assess agreement using estimates of bias and clinical limits of agreement (CLA) based on repeatability coefficients.
RESULTS: In the HRT-II study group, agreement between stereometric parameters was good, with no statistically significant biases. For all parameters, differences were within the CLA in 94% of participants. In the HRT-I vs. HRT-II study group, there was a small statistically significant bias between the stereometric parameters, but all differences were within CLA for ≥95% of participants. In both study groups, PEC did not improve agreement.
CONCLUSIONS: Agreement between HRT-I and HRT-II stereometric parameters was good, and PEC did not improve agreement. These results suggest that HRT-I and HRT-II examinations can be used interchangeably to detect changes in stereometric parameters over time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21037499      PMCID: PMC3014384          DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e3181fc3467

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Optom Vis Sci        ISSN: 1040-5488            Impact factor:   1.973


  21 in total

1.  Method comparison--a different approach.

Authors:  M A Pollock; S G Jefferson; J W Kane; K Lomax; G MacKinnon; C B Winnard
Journal:  Ann Clin Biochem       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 2.057

2.  Interpreting method comparison studies by use of the bland-altman plot: reflecting the importance of sample size by incorporating confidence limits and predefined error limits in the graphic.

Authors:  Dietmar Stöckl; Diego Rodríguez Cabaleiro; Katleen Van Uytfanghe; Linda M Thienpont
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 8.327

3.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Evaluation of method-comparison data.

Authors:  S Eksborg
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  1981-07       Impact factor: 8.327

5.  Agreement between Heidelberg Retina Tomograph-I and -II in detecting glaucomatous changes using topographic change analysis.

Authors:  M Balasubramanian; C Bowd; R N Weinreb; L M Zangwill
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2010-10-01       Impact factor: 3.775

6.  Effect of glaucomatous damage on repeatability of confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope, scanning laser polarimetry, and optical coherence tomography.

Authors:  Julio E DeLeón Ortega; Lisandro M Sakata; Bobby Kakati; Gerald McGwin; Blythe E Monheit; Stella N Arthur; Christopher A Girkin
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 4.799

7.  Measurement variability in Heidelberg Retina Tomograph imaging of neuroretinal rim area.

Authors:  Victoria M F Owen; Nicholas G Strouthidis; David F Garway-Heath; David P Crabb
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 4.799

8.  Agreement between clinicians and a confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope in estimating cup/disk ratios.

Authors:  L Zangwill; S Shakiba; J Caprioli; R N Weinreb
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 5.258

9.  The African Descent and Glaucoma Evaluation Study (ADAGES): design and baseline data.

Authors:  Pamela A Sample; Christopher A Girkin; Linda M Zangwill; Sonia Jain; Lyne Racette; Lida M Becerra; Robert N Weinreb; Felipe A Medeiros; M Roy Wilson; Julio De León-Ortega; Celso Tello; Christopher Bowd; Jeffrey M Liebmann
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-09

10.  A comparison of optic disc topographic parameters in patients with primary open angle glaucoma, normal tension glaucoma, and ocular hypertension.

Authors:  Naoko Kiriyama; Akira Ando; Chieko Fukui; Hiroyuki Nambu; Maki Nishikawa; Hiroo Terauchi; Atsuko Kuwahara; Miyo Matsumura
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2003-06-18       Impact factor: 3.117

View more
  2 in total

1.  Agreement between Heidelberg Retina Tomograph-I and -II in detecting glaucomatous changes using topographic change analysis.

Authors:  M Balasubramanian; C Bowd; R N Weinreb; L M Zangwill
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2010-10-01       Impact factor: 3.775

2.  Comparison of neuroretinal rim area measurements made by the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph I and the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph II.

Authors:  Ya Xing Wang; Neil O'Leary; Nicholas G Strouthidis; Edward T White; Tuan A Ho; David F Garway-Heath
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2013 Oct-Nov       Impact factor: 2.503

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.