PURPOSE: Longitudinal measurements of peripapillary RNFL thickness and retardance were compared in terms of time to reach onset of damage and time to reach a specific progression endpoint. METHODS: A total of 41 rhesus macaques with unilateral experimental glaucoma (EG) each had three or more weekly baseline measurements in both eyes of peripapillary RNFL thickness (RNFLT) and retardance. Laser photocoagulation was then applied to the trabecular meshwork of one eye to induce chronic elevation of intraocular pressure and weekly imaging continued. Pairwise differences between baseline observations were sampled by bootstrapping to determine the 95% confidence limits of each measurement's repeatability. The first two sequential measurements below the lower confidence limit defined the endpoint for each parameter. Segmented linear and exponential decay functions were fit to each RNFL-versus-time series to determine the time to damage onset. RESULTS: In all, 29 (71%) of the EG eyes reached endpoint by RNFL retardance and 25 (61%) reached endpoint by RNFLT. In total, 33 (80%) reached endpoint by at least one of the RNFL parameters and 21 (51%) reached endpoint by both RNFL parameters. Of the 33 EG eyes reaching any endpoint, a larger proportion reached endpoint first by retardance (n = 26, 79%) than did by RNFLT (n = 7, 21%; P = 0.002). Survival analysis indicated a shorter time to reach endpoint by retardance than by RNFLT (P < 0.001). Of the 21 EG eyes that reached endpoint by both measures, the median duration to endpoint was 120 days for retardance and 223 days for RNFLT (P = 0.003, Wilcoxon test). The time to onset was faster for retardance than that for RNFLT based on either segmented fits (by 31 days; P = 0.008, average R(2) = 0.89) or exponential fits (by 102 days; P = 0.01, average R(2) = 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: The onset of progressive loss of RNFL retardance occurs earlier than the onset of RNFL thinning. Endpoints of progressive loss from baseline also occurred more frequently and earlier for RNFL retardance as compared with RNFLT.
PURPOSE: Longitudinal measurements of peripapillary RNFL thickness and retardance were compared in terms of time to reach onset of damage and time to reach a specific progression endpoint. METHODS: A total of 41 rhesus macaques with unilateral experimental glaucoma (EG) each had three or more weekly baseline measurements in both eyes of peripapillary RNFL thickness (RNFLT) and retardance. Laser photocoagulation was then applied to the trabecular meshwork of one eye to induce chronic elevation of intraocular pressure and weekly imaging continued. Pairwise differences between baseline observations were sampled by bootstrapping to determine the 95% confidence limits of each measurement's repeatability. The first two sequential measurements below the lower confidence limit defined the endpoint for each parameter. Segmented linear and exponential decay functions were fit to each RNFL-versus-time series to determine the time to damage onset. RESULTS: In all, 29 (71%) of the EG eyes reached endpoint by RNFL retardance and 25 (61%) reached endpoint by RNFLT. In total, 33 (80%) reached endpoint by at least one of the RNFL parameters and 21 (51%) reached endpoint by both RNFL parameters. Of the 33 EG eyes reaching any endpoint, a larger proportion reached endpoint first by retardance (n = 26, 79%) than did by RNFLT (n = 7, 21%; P = 0.002). Survival analysis indicated a shorter time to reach endpoint by retardance than by RNFLT (P < 0.001). Of the 21 EG eyes that reached endpoint by both measures, the median duration to endpoint was 120 days for retardance and 223 days for RNFLT (P = 0.003, Wilcoxon test). The time to onset was faster for retardance than that for RNFLT based on either segmented fits (by 31 days; P = 0.008, average R(2) = 0.89) or exponential fits (by 102 days; P = 0.01, average R(2) = 0.89). CONCLUSIONS: The onset of progressive loss of RNFL retardance occurs earlier than the onset of RNFL thinning. Endpoints of progressive loss from baseline also occurred more frequently and earlier for RNFL retardance as compared with RNFLT.
Authors: Josine van der Schoot; Koenraad A Vermeer; Johannes F de Boer; Hans G Lemij Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2012-04-30 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Brad Fortune; Hongli Yang; Nicholas G Strouthidis; Grant A Cull; Jonathan L Grimm; J Crawford Downs; Claude F Burgoyne Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2009-05-06 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Grant A Cull; Juan Reynaud; Lin Wang; George A Cioffi; Claude F Burgoyne; Brad Fortune Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2012-11-21 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Dean A VanNasdale; Ann E Elsner; Todd D Peabody; Kimberly D Kohne; Victor E Malinovsky; Bryan P Haggerty; Anke Weber; Christopher A Clark; Stephen A Burns Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2014-12-18 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Mitsuro Sugita; Michael Pircher; Stefan Zotter; Bernhard Baumann; Philipp Roberts; Tomoyuki Makihira; Nobuhiro Tomatsu; Makoto Sato; Clemens Vass; Christoph K Hitzenberger Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2015-02-26 Impact factor: 3.732
Authors: Stanislava Fialová; Marco Augustin; Martin Glösmann; Tanja Himmel; Sabine Rauscher; Marion Gröger; Michael Pircher; Christoph K Hitzenberger; Bernhard Baumann Journal: Biomed Opt Express Date: 2016-03-24 Impact factor: 3.732