Hae-Young Lopilly Park1, Hye-Young Shin2, Chan Kee Park3. 1. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea; Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, Seoul, South Korea. 2. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea; Uijungbu St. Mary's Hospital, Uijungbu, South Korea. 3. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea; Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, Seoul, South Korea. Electronic address: ckpark@catholic.ac.kr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the detection rates of identifying the posterior border of the sclera and lamina cribrosa and measurement reproducibility of scleral and laminar thicknesses using the enhanced depth imaging (EDI) of Heidelberg Spectralis optical coherence tomography (OCT) and swept-source OCT. DESIGN: Cross-sectional design. METHODS: Both EDI-OCT and swept-source OCT images were obtained in 32 myopic glaucoma patients. Subfoveal choroidal, subfoveal scleral, and central laminar thicknesses were measured from obtained B-scan images. Each measurement was performed at 3 locations by 2 masked observers. The detection rates and measurement reproducibility were evaluated from selected B-scans. RESULTS: The posterior border of the sclera was visible in 10 eyes (31%) using EDI-OCT. This was improved to be visible in 17 eyes (53%) using swept-source OCT. According to the McNemar χ(2) test, the detection rate of the posterior border of the sclera was significantly different between EDI-OCT and swept-source OCT (P = 0.008). The detection rate of the posterior border of the lamina cribrosa was similar for the 2 devices. In highly myopic eyes, the detection rate of the posterior border of the sclera and lamina cribrosa was not statistically different between EDI-OCT and swept-source OCT. Intersystem ICCs was 0.769 (95% CI, 0.714-0.893) for subfoveal scleral thickness and 0.900 (95% CI, 0.887-0.917) for laminar thickness. The mean subfoveal scleral thickness was 464.32 ± 213.24 μm using EDI-OCT and 650.26 ± 222.30 μm using swept-source OCT. There was statistical difference in the measured subfoveal scleral thickness by the 2 devices (P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with EDI-OCT, swept-source OCT had an advantage in imaging the posterior sclera. Imaging the lamina cribrosa was similar when using both devices.
PURPOSE: To compare the detection rates of identifying the posterior border of the sclera and lamina cribrosa and measurement reproducibility of scleral and laminar thicknesses using the enhanced depth imaging (EDI) of Heidelberg Spectralis optical coherence tomography (OCT) and swept-source OCT. DESIGN: Cross-sectional design. METHODS: Both EDI-OCT and swept-source OCT images were obtained in 32 myopic glaucomapatients. Subfoveal choroidal, subfoveal scleral, and central laminar thicknesses were measured from obtained B-scan images. Each measurement was performed at 3 locations by 2 masked observers. The detection rates and measurement reproducibility were evaluated from selected B-scans. RESULTS: The posterior border of the sclera was visible in 10 eyes (31%) using EDI-OCT. This was improved to be visible in 17 eyes (53%) using swept-source OCT. According to the McNemar χ(2) test, the detection rate of the posterior border of the sclera was significantly different between EDI-OCT and swept-source OCT (P = 0.008). The detection rate of the posterior border of the lamina cribrosa was similar for the 2 devices. In highly myopic eyes, the detection rate of the posterior border of the sclera and lamina cribrosa was not statistically different between EDI-OCT and swept-source OCT. Intersystem ICCs was 0.769 (95% CI, 0.714-0.893) for subfoveal scleral thickness and 0.900 (95% CI, 0.887-0.917) for laminar thickness. The mean subfoveal scleral thickness was 464.32 ± 213.24 μm using EDI-OCT and 650.26 ± 222.30 μm using swept-source OCT. There was statistical difference in the measured subfoveal scleral thickness by the 2 devices (P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with EDI-OCT, swept-source OCT had an advantage in imaging the posterior sclera. Imaging the lamina cribrosa was similar when using both devices.
Authors: D S C Ng; C Y L Cheung; F O Luk; S Mohamed; M E Brelen; J C S Yam; C W Tsang; T Y Y Lai Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2016-04-08 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Zhiyong Yang; Andrew J Tatham; Linda M Zangwill; Robert N Weinreb; Chunwei Zhang; Felipe A Medeiros Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2014-10-22 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: S M Waldstein; H Faatz; M Szimacsek; A-M Glodan; D Podkowinski; A Montuoro; C Simader; B S Gerendas; U Schmidt-Erfurth Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2015-01-16 Impact factor: 3.775