Literature DB >> 28855198

Diagnostic accuracy of optical coherence tomography for diagnosing glaucoma: secondary analyses of the GATE study.

Gianni Virgili1, Manuele Michelessi2, Jonathan Cook3, Charles Boachie4, Jennifer Burr5, Katie Banister6, David F Garway-Heath7, Rupert R A Bourne8, Almudena Asorey Garcia9, Craig R Ramsay6, Augusto Azuara-Blanco10.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To assess the diagnostic performance of retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) data of optical coherence tomography (OCT) for detecting glaucoma.
METHODS: Secondary analyses of a prospective, multicentre diagnostic study (Glaucoma Automated Tests Evaluation (GATE)) referred to hospital eye services in the UK were conducted. We included data from 899 of 966 participants referred to hospital eye services with suspected glaucoma or ocular hypertension. We used both eyes' data and logistic regression-based receiver operator characteristics analysis to build a set of models to measure the sensitivity and specificity of the average and inferior quadrant RNFL thickness data of OCT. The reference standard was expert clinician examination including automated perimetry. The main outcome measures were sensitivity at 0.95 specificity and specificity at 0.95 sensitivity and the corresponding RNFL thickness thresholds. We explored the possibility of accuracy improvement by adding measures of within-eye and between-eye variation, scan quality, intraocular pressure (IOP) and age.
RESULTS: Glaucoma was diagnosed in at least one eye in 17% of participants. Areas under the curve were between 0.83 and 0.88. When specificity was fixed at 0.95, the sensitivity was between 0.38 and 0.55, and the highest values were reached with models including the inferior quadrant rather than the average RNFL thickness. Fixing sensitivity at 0.95, the specificity was between 0.36 and 0.58. The addition of age, refractive error, IOP or within-subject variation did not improve the accuracy.
CONCLUSION: RNFL thickness data of OCT can be used as a diagnostic test, but accuracy estimates remain moderate even in exploratory multivariable modelling of aiming to improve accuracy. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Entities:  

Keywords:  diagnostic tests/investigation; glaucoma; imaging

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28855198     DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2017-310642

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0007-1161            Impact factor:   4.638


  5 in total

1.  Within-eye and between-subject variability for reflectance of the retinal nerve fibre layer.

Authors:  Hin Cheung; William H Swanson; Brett J King
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  2022-08-01       Impact factor: 3.992

2.  Accuracy of optical coherence tomography for diagnosing glaucoma: an overview of systematic reviews.

Authors:  Manuele Michelessi; Tianjing Li; Alba Miele; Augusto Azuara-Blanco; Riaz Qureshi; Gianni Virgili
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-06-03       Impact factor: 4.638

3.  A Simple Subjective Evaluation of Enface OCT Reflectance Images Distinguishes Glaucoma From Healthy Eyes.

Authors:  Riccardo Cheloni; Simon D Dewsbery; Jonathan Denniss
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2021-05-03       Impact factor: 3.283

4.  Detection of Glaucoma and Other Vision-Threatening Ocular Diseases in the Population Recruited at Specific Health Checkups in Japan.

Authors:  Masakazu Yamada; Yoshimune Hiratsuka; Tadashi Nakano; Yoshiyuki Kita; Tomoyuki Watanabe; Hiroshi Tamura; Ryo Kawasaki; Tetsuji Yokoyama; Shigeru Takano
Journal:  Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2020-12-17       Impact factor: 4.790

5.  Monitoring for glaucoma progression with SAP, electroretinography (PERG and PhNR) and OCT.

Authors:  Barbara Cvenkel; Maja Sustar; Darko Perovšek
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-10-15       Impact factor: 2.379

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.