Literature DB >> 25719380

Axial Globe Position Measurement: A Prospective Multicenter Study by the International Thyroid Eye Disease Society.

Chad M Bingham1, Jennifer A Sivak-Callcott, Matthew J Gurka, John Nguyen, Jeffery P Hogg, Steve E Feldon, Aaron Fay, Lay-Leng Seah, Diego Strianese, Vikram D Durairaj, Jimmy Uddin, Martin H Devoto, Matheson Harris, Justin Saunders, Tammy H Osaki, Audrey Looi, Livia Teo, Brett W Davies, Andrea Elefante, Sunny Shen, Tony Realini, William Fischer, Michael Kazim.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Identify a reproducible measure of axial globe position (AGP) for multicenter studies on patients with thyroid eye disease (TED).
METHODS: This is a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study in which 3 types of AGP evaluation were examined: radiologic, clinical, and photographic. In this study, CT was the modality to which all other methods were compared. CT AGP was measured from an orthogonal line between the anterior lateral orbital rims to the cornea. All CT measurements were made at a single institution by 3 individual clinicians. Clinical evaluation was performed with exophthalmometry. Three clinicians from each clinical site assessed AGP with 3 different exophthalmometers and horizontal palpebral width using a ruler. Each physician made 3 separate measurements with each type of exophthalmometer not in succession. All photographic measurements were made at a single institution. AGP was measured from lateral photographs in which a standard marker was placed at the anterior lateral orbital rim. Horizontal and vertical palpebral fissure were measured from frontal photographs. Three trained readers measured 3 separate times not in succession. Exophthalmometry and photography method validity was assessed by agreement with CT (mean differences calculation, intraclass correlation coefficients [ICCs], Bland-Altman figures). Correlation between palpebral fissure and CT AGP was assessed with Pearson correlation. Intraclinician and interclinician reliability was evaluated using ICCs.
RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients from 7 centers participated. CT mean AGP was 21.37 mm (15.96-28.90 mm) right and 21.22 mm (15.87-28.70 mm) left (ICC 0.996 and 0.995). Exophthalmometry AGP fell between 18 mm and 25 mm. Intraclinician agreement across exophthalmometers was ideal (ICC 0.948-0.983). Agreement between clinicians was greater than 0.85 for all upright exophthalmometry measurements. Photographic mean AGP was 20.47 mm (10.92-30.88 mm) right and 20.30 mm (8.61-28.72 mm) left. Intrareader and interreader agreement was ideal (ICC 0.991-0.989). All exophthalmometers' mean differences from CT ranged between -0.06 mm (±1.36 mm) and 0.54 mm (±1.61 mm); 95% confidence interval fell within 1 mm. Magnitude of AGP did not affect exophthalmometry validity. Oculus best estimated CT AGP but differences from other exophthalmometers were not clinically meaningful in upright measurements. Photographic AGP (right ICC = 0.575, left ICC = 0.355) and palpebral fissure do not agree with CT.
CONCLUSIONS: Upright clinical exophthalmometry accurately estimates CT AGP in TED. AGP measurement was reliably reproduced by the same clinician and between clinicians at multiple institutions using the protocol in this study. These findings allow reliable measurement of AGP that will be of considerable value in future outcome studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 25719380      PMCID: PMC4549213          DOI: 10.1097/IOP.0000000000000437

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 0740-9303            Impact factor:   1.746


  24 in total

1.  Hertel exophthalmometry: the most appropriate measuring technique.

Authors:  N P O'Donnell; M Virdi; E G Kemp
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 4.638

2.  Hertel exophthalmometry: reliability and interobserver variation.

Authors:  Mohsen Bahmani Kashkouli; Bijan Beigi; Mohammad Mahdi Noorani; Marzieh Nojoomi
Journal:  Orbit       Date:  2003-12

3.  Exophthalmometry and a new exophthalmometer.

Authors:  L C DREWS
Journal:  Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc       Date:  1956

4.  Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) were proposed.

Authors:  Jan Kottner; Laurent Audigé; Stig Brorson; Allan Donner; Byron J Gajewski; Asbjørn Hróbjartsson; Chris Roberts; Mohamed Shoukri; David L Streiner
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2010-06-17       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  Effect of exophthalmometer design on its accuracy.

Authors:  Yoav Vardizer; Tos T J M Berendschot; Maarten P Mourits
Journal:  Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 1.746

6.  Errors of single-mirror or prism Hertel exophthalmometers and recommendations for minimizing the errors.

Authors:  W Terry Frueh; Bartley R Frueh
Journal:  Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2007 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.746

Review 7.  Parallax-free exophthalmometry: a comprehensive review of the literature on clinical exophthalmometry and the introduction of the first parallax-free exophthalmometer.

Authors:  Stijn W Genders; Daphne L Mourits; Mohammad Jasem; Roel J H M Kloos; Peerooz Saeed; Maarten Ph Mourits
Journal:  Orbit       Date:  2014-10-14

8.  Exophthalmometer readings in patients with Graves' eye disease.

Authors:  B R Frueh; D C Musch; F W Garber
Journal:  Ophthalmic Surg       Date:  1986-01

9.  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

10.  The reliability of Hertel exophthalmometry. Observer variation between physician and lay readers.

Authors:  D C Musch; B R Frueh; J R Landis
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1985-09       Impact factor: 12.079

View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Ophthalmic and orbital considerations in the evaluation of skull base malignancies.

Authors:  Justin N Karlin; Howard R Krauss
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2020-05-02       Impact factor: 4.130

2.  The role of ultrasonography in differential diagnosis of orbital lesions.

Authors:  Vittoria Lanni; Adriana Iuliano; Federica Fossataro; Camilla Russo; Giovanni Uccello; Fausto Tranfa; Diego Strianese; Gianfranco Vallone
Journal:  J Ultrasound       Date:  2020-03-12

3.  Interruption of autoimmunity for thyroid eye disease: B-cell and T-cell strategy.

Authors:  Diego Strianese; Francesca Rossi
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2019-01-04       Impact factor: 3.775

4.  A Novel Three-Dimensional Vector Analysis of Axial Globe Position in Thyroid Eye Disease.

Authors:  Jie Guo; Jiang Qian; Yifei Yuan; Rui Zhang; Wenhu Huang
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-04-09       Impact factor: 1.909

5.  Association of anthropometric markers with globe position: A population-based MRI study.

Authors:  Patrick Schmidt; Robert Kempin; Sönke Langner; Achim Beule; Stefan Kindler; Thomas Koppe; Henry Völzke; Till Ittermann; Clemens Jürgens; Frank Tost
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-02-07       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  The study of relationship between ocular biometry and exophthalmometry in adult Malay population of Kelantan, Malaysia.

Authors:  Ui Lyn Loh; Fazilawati A Qamarruddin; Adil Hussein
Journal:  Taiwan J Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-03-29

7.  Validation of exophthalmos magnetic resonance imaging measurements in patients with Graves' orbitopathy, compared to ophthalmometry results.

Authors:  Emilia Wnuk; Edyta Maj; Anna Jabłońska-Pawlak; Maria Jeczeń; Katarzyna Rowińska-Berman; Olgierd Rowiński
Journal:  Pol J Radiol       Date:  2022-09-30

8.  Current insights of applying MRI in Graves' ophthalmopathy.

Authors:  Cheng Song; Yaosheng Luo; Genfeng Yu; Haixiong Chen; Jie Shen
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-09-29       Impact factor: 6.055

9.  A Comparative Study of Clinical vs. Digital Exophthalmometry Measurement Methods.

Authors:  Tháıs de Sous Pereira; Cristina Hiromi Kuniyoshi; Cristiane de Almeida Leite; Eloisa M M S Gebrim; Mário L R Monteiro; Allan C Pieroni Gonçalves
Journal:  J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-03-23       Impact factor: 1.909

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.