Vishva M Danthurebandara1, Glen P Sharpe1, Donna M Hutchison1, Jonathan Denniss2, Marcelo T Nicolela1, Allison M McKendrick3, Andrew Turpin4, Balwantray C Chauhan1. 1. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Dalhousie University and Capital Health District Authority, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. 2. Department of Optometry and Vision Sciences, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Department of Computing and Information Systems, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 3. Department of Optometry and Vision Sciences, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 4. Department of Computing and Information Systems, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the structure-function relationship between disc margin-based rim area (DM-RA) obtained with confocal scanning laser tomography (CSLT), Bruch's membrane opening-based horizontal rim width (BMO-HRW), minimum rim width (BMO-MRW), peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer thickness (RNFLT) obtained with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT), and visual field sensitivity. METHODS: We examined 151 glaucoma patients with CSLT, SD-OCT, and standard automated perimetry on the same day. Optic nerve head (ONH) and RNFL with SD-OCT were acquired relative to a fixed coordinate system (acquired image frame [AIF]) and to the eye-specific fovea-BMO center (FoBMO) axis. Visual field locations were mapped to ONH and RNFL sectors with fixed Garway-Heath (VF(GH)) and patient-specific (VF(PS)) maps customized for various biometric parameters. RESULTS: Globally and sectorally, the structure-function relationships between DM-RA and VF(GH), BMO-HRW(AIF) and VF(GH), and BMO-HRW(FoBMO) and VF(PS) were equally weak. The R(2) for the relationship between DM-RA and VF(GH) ranged from 0.1% (inferonasal) to 11% (superotemporal) whereas that between BMO-HRW(AIF) and VF(GH) ranged from 0.1% (nasal) to 10% (superotemporal). Relatively stronger global and sectoral structure-function relationships with BMO-MRW(AIF) and with BMO-MRW(FoBMO) were obtained. The R(2) between BMO-MRW(AIF) and VF(GH) ranged from 5% (nasal) to 30% (superotemporal), whereas that between BMO-MRW(FoBMO) and VF(PS) ranged from 5% (nasal) to 25% (inferotemporal). The structure-function relationship with RNFLT was not significantly different from that with BMO-MRW, regardless of image acquisition method. CONCLUSIONS: The structure-function relationship was enhanced with BMO-MRW compared with the other neuroretinal rim measurements, due mainly to its geometrically accurate properties. Copyright 2014 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the structure-function relationship between disc margin-based rim area (DM-RA) obtained with confocal scanning laser tomography (CSLT), Bruch's membrane opening-based horizontal rim width (BMO-HRW), minimum rim width (BMO-MRW), peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer thickness (RNFLT) obtained with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT), and visual field sensitivity. METHODS: We examined 151 glaucomapatients with CSLT, SD-OCT, and standard automated perimetry on the same day. Optic nerve head (ONH) and RNFL with SD-OCT were acquired relative to a fixed coordinate system (acquired image frame [AIF]) and to the eye-specific fovea-BMO center (FoBMO) axis. Visual field locations were mapped to ONH and RNFL sectors with fixed Garway-Heath (VF(GH)) and patient-specific (VF(PS)) maps customized for various biometric parameters. RESULTS: Globally and sectorally, the structure-function relationships between DM-RA and VF(GH), BMO-HRW(AIF) and VF(GH), and BMO-HRW(FoBMO) and VF(PS) were equally weak. The R(2) for the relationship between DM-RA and VF(GH) ranged from 0.1% (inferonasal) to 11% (superotemporal) whereas that between BMO-HRW(AIF) and VF(GH) ranged from 0.1% (nasal) to 10% (superotemporal). Relatively stronger global and sectoral structure-function relationships with BMO-MRW(AIF) and with BMO-MRW(FoBMO) were obtained. The R(2) between BMO-MRW(AIF) and VF(GH) ranged from 5% (nasal) to 30% (superotemporal), whereas that between BMO-MRW(FoBMO) and VF(PS) ranged from 5% (nasal) to 25% (inferotemporal). The structure-function relationship with RNFLT was not significantly different from that with BMO-MRW, regardless of image acquisition method. CONCLUSIONS: The structure-function relationship was enhanced with BMO-MRW compared with the other neuroretinal rim measurements, due mainly to its geometrically accurate properties. Copyright 2014 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
Authors: Tin A Tun; Eray Atalay; Mani Baskaran; Monisha E Nongpiur; Hla M Htoon; David Goh; Ching-Yu Cheng; Shamira A Perera; Tin Aung; Nicholas G Strouthidis; Michaël J A Girard Journal: JAMA Ophthalmol Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 7.389
Authors: Lindsay A Rhodes; Carrie E Huisingh; Adam E Quinn; Gerald McGwin; Frank LaRussa; Daniel Box; Cynthia Owsley; Christopher A Girkin Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2016-11-05 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Lukas Reznicek; Sophie Burzer; Andrea Laubichler; Ali Nasseri; Chris P Lohmann; Nikolaus Feucht; Michael Ulbig; Mathias Maier Journal: Int J Ophthalmol Date: 2017-10-18 Impact factor: 1.779
Authors: Yi Hua; Andrew P Voorhees; Ning-Jiun Jan; Bingrui Wang; Susannah Waxman; Joel S Schuman; Ian A Sigal Journal: Exp Eye Res Date: 2020-08-14 Impact factor: 3.467