Literature DB >> 21555599

Quantifying discordance between structure and function measurements in the clinical assessment of glaucoma.

Haogang Zhu1, David P Crabb, Marie-Josée Fredette, Douglas R Anderson, David F Garway-Heath.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a new method of quantifying and visualizing discordance between structural and functional measurements in glaucomatous eyes by predicting the visual field (VF) from retinal nerve fiber layer thickness (RNFLT) using a bayesian radial basis function.
METHODS: Five GDx VCC RNFLT scans and 5 Humphrey 24-2 Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm VF tests were performed for 50 glaucomatous eyes from 50 patients. A best-available estimate (BAE) of the true VF was calculated as the pointwise median of these 5 replications. This BAE VF was compared with every RNFLT-predicted VF from the bayesian radial basis function and every measured VF. Predictability of VFs from RNFLT was established from previous data. A structure-function pattern discordance map and a structure-function discordance index (scores of 0-1) were established from the predictability limits for each structure-function measurement pair to quantify and visualize the discordance between the structure-predicted and measured VFs.
RESULTS: The mean absolute difference between the structure-predicted and BAE VFs was 3.9 dB. The mean absolute difference between measured and BAE VFs was 2.6 dB. The mean (SD) structure-function discordance index score was 0.34 (0.11). Ninety-seven (39%) of the structure-predicted VFs showed significant discordance (structure-function discordance index score >0.3) from measured VFs.
CONCLUSIONS: On average, the bayesian radial basis function predicts the BAE VF from RNFLT slightly less well than a measured VF from the 5 VFs composing the BAE VF. The pattern discordance map highlights locations with structure-function discordance, with the structure-function discordance index providing a summary index. These tools may help clinicians trust the mutually confirmatory structure-function measurements with good concordance or identify unreliable ones with poor concordance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21555599     DOI: 10.1001/archophthalmol.2011.112

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0003-9950


  14 in total

1.  Evaluation of Visual Field and Imaging Outcomes for Glaucoma Clinical Trials (An American Ophthalomological Society Thesis).

Authors:  David F Garway-Heath; Ana Quartilho; Philip Prah; David P Crabb; Qian Cheng; Haogang Zhu
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  2017-08-22

2.  [Flicker and conventional perimetry in comparison with structural changes in glaucoma].

Authors:  F Dannheim
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 1.059

3.  Choice of statistical method influences apparent association between structure and function in glaucoma.

Authors:  Iván Marín-Franch; Rizwan Malik; David P Crabb; William H Swanson
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2013-06-19       Impact factor: 4.799

4.  [Conventional perimetry. Antiquated or indispensable for functional glaucoma diagnostics?].

Authors:  F Tonagel; B Voykov; U Schiefer
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 1.059

5.  Retinal nerve fiber layer atrophy is associated with visual field loss over time in glaucoma suspect and glaucomatous eyes.

Authors:  Mitra Sehi; Xinbo Zhang; David S Greenfield; Yunsuk Chung; Gadi Wollstein; Brian A Francis; Joel S Schuman; Rohit Varma; David Huang
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-10-01       Impact factor: 5.258

6.  Estimating the rate of retinal ganglion cell loss in glaucoma.

Authors:  Felipe A Medeiros; Linda M Zangwill; Douglas R Anderson; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Christopher A Girkin; Ronald S Harwerth; Marie-Josée Fredette; Robert N Weinreb
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-07-27       Impact factor: 5.258

7.  Glaucoma Diagnosis and Monitoring Using Advanced Imaging Technologies.

Authors:  Mitra Sehi; Shawn M Iverson
Journal:  US Ophthalmic Rev       Date:  2013

8.  A survey of attitudes of glaucoma subspecialists in England and Wales to visual field test intervals in relation to NICE guidelines.

Authors:  Rizwan Malik; Helen Baker; Richard A Russell; David P Crabb
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-05-03       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  Does the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) accurately map visual field loss attributed to vigabatrin?

Authors:  Miriam L Conway; Sarah L Hosking; Haogang Zhu; Robert P Cubbidge
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-12-23       Impact factor: 2.209

10.  Automated classifiers for early detection and diagnosis of retinopathy in diabetic eyes.

Authors:  Gábor Márk Somfai; Erika Tátrai; Lenke Laurik; Boglárka Varga; Veronika Ölvedy; Hong Jiang; Jianhua Wang; William E Smiddy; Anikó Somogyi; Delia Cabrera DeBuc
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2014-04-12       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.