Kelvin H Wan1,2, Alexander K N Lam1, Christopher Kai-Shun Leung1. 1. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, Tuen Mun Eye Center and Tuen Mun Hospital, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China.
Abstract
Importance: Whether optical coherence tomography angiography (OCT-A) outperforms OCT to detect glaucoma remains inconclusive. Objective: To compare (1) the diagnostic performance for detection of glaucoma and (2) the structure-function association between inner macular vessel density and inner macular thickness. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included 115 patients with glaucoma and 35 healthy individuals for measurements of retinal thickness and retinal vessel density, segmented between the anterior boundary of internal limiting membrane and the posterior boundary of the inner plexiform layer, over the 3 × 3-mm2 macula using swept-source OCT. All participants were Chinese. Visual sensitivity corresponding to the 3 × 3-mm2 macular region was expressed in unlogged 1/lambert for investigation of the structure-function associations. Diagnostic performance was evaluated with area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs). The study was conducted between January 12, 2016, and December 12, 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures: Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and R2 analysis. Results: Of the 115 patients with glaucoma, 42 (36.5%) were women (mean [SD] age, 53.5 [13.4] years); of the 35 individuals with healthy eyes, 25 (71.4%) were women (age, 60.6 [5.9] years). Inner macular vessel density and thickness were 4.3% (95% CI, 2.4%-6.1%) and 21.1 μm (95% CI, 17.4-24.9 μm) smaller, respectively, in eyes with glaucoma compared with healthy eyes. The AUC of mean inner macular thickness for glaucoma detection was greater than that of mean inner macular vessel density (difference, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.01-0.31; P = .03). At 90% specificity, the sensitivity of mean inner macular thicknesses for detection of glaucoma was greater than that of mean inner macular vessel densities (difference, 29.2%; 95% CI, 11.5%-64.6%; P = .02). The strength of the structure-function association was stronger for mean inner macular thickness than mean inner macular vessel density in the linear (difference in R2 = 0.38; 95% CI, 0.22-0.54; P < .001) and nonlinear (difference in R2 = 0.36; 95% CI, 0.21-0.51; P < .001) regression models. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, OCT measurement of inner macular thickness shows a higher diagnostic performance to detect glaucoma and a stronger structure-function association than the currently used OCT-A measurement of inner macular vessel density. These findings may suggest that OCT-A of the macula has a limited role in the diagnostic evaluation of glaucoma.
Importance: Whether optical coherence tomography angiography (OCT-A) outperforms OCT to detect glaucoma remains inconclusive. Objective: To compare (1) the diagnostic performance for detection of glaucoma and (2) the structure-function association between inner macular vessel density and inner macular thickness. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study included 115 patients with glaucoma and 35 healthy individuals for measurements of retinal thickness and retinal vessel density, segmented between the anterior boundary of internal limiting membrane and the posterior boundary of the inner plexiform layer, over the 3 × 3-mm2 macula using swept-source OCT. All participants were Chinese. Visual sensitivity corresponding to the 3 × 3-mm2 macular region was expressed in unlogged 1/lambert for investigation of the structure-function associations. Diagnostic performance was evaluated with area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs). The study was conducted between January 12, 2016, and December 12, 2016. Main Outcomes and Measures: Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and R2 analysis. Results: Of the 115 patients with glaucoma, 42 (36.5%) were women (mean [SD] age, 53.5 [13.4] years); of the 35 individuals with healthy eyes, 25 (71.4%) were women (age, 60.6 [5.9] years). Inner macular vessel density and thickness were 4.3% (95% CI, 2.4%-6.1%) and 21.1 μm (95% CI, 17.4-24.9 μm) smaller, respectively, in eyes with glaucoma compared with healthy eyes. The AUC of mean inner macular thickness for glaucoma detection was greater than that of mean inner macular vessel density (difference, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.01-0.31; P = .03). At 90% specificity, the sensitivity of mean inner macular thicknesses for detection of glaucoma was greater than that of mean inner macular vessel densities (difference, 29.2%; 95% CI, 11.5%-64.6%; P = .02). The strength of the structure-function association was stronger for mean inner macular thickness than mean inner macular vessel density in the linear (difference in R2 = 0.38; 95% CI, 0.22-0.54; P < .001) and nonlinear (difference in R2 = 0.36; 95% CI, 0.21-0.51; P < .001) regression models. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, OCT measurement of inner macular thickness shows a higher diagnostic performance to detect glaucoma and a stronger structure-function association than the currently used OCT-A measurement of inner macular vessel density. These findings may suggest that OCT-A of the macula has a limited role in the diagnostic evaluation of glaucoma.
Authors: Harsha L Rao; Zia S Pradhan; Robert N Weinreb; Hemanth B Reddy; Mohammed Riyazuddin; Sonia Sachdeva; Narendra K Puttaiah; Chaitra Jayadev; Carroll A B Webers Journal: J Glaucoma Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Marta Pazos; Agnieszka Anna Dyrda; Marc Biarnés; Alicia Gómez; Carlos Martín; Clara Mora; Gianluca Fatti; Alfonso Antón Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2017-04-29 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Liang Liu; Yali Jia; Hana L Takusagawa; Alex D Pechauer; Beth Edmunds; Lorinna Lombardi; Ellen Davis; John C Morrison; David Huang Journal: JAMA Ophthalmol Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 7.389
Authors: Yali Jia; Eric Wei; Xiaogang Wang; Xinbo Zhang; John C Morrison; Mansi Parikh; Lori H Lombardi; Devin M Gattey; Rebecca L Armour; Beth Edmunds; Martin F Kraus; James G Fujimoto; David Huang Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2014-03-12 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Hana L Takusagawa; Liang Liu; Kelly N Ma; Yali Jia; Simon S Gao; Miao Zhang; Beth Edmunds; Mansi Parikh; Shandiz Tehrani; John C Morrison; David Huang Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Adeleh Yarmohammadi; Linda M Zangwill; Alberto Diniz-Filho; Min Hee Suh; Patricia Isabel Manalastas; Naeem Fatehee; Siamak Yousefi; Akram Belghith; Luke J Saunders; Felipe A Medeiros; David Huang; Robert N Weinreb Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2016-07-01 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Harsha L Rao; Zia S Pradhan; Robert N Weinreb; Mohammed Riyazuddin; Srilakshmi Dasari; Jayasree P Venugopal; Narendra K Puttaiah; Dhanaraj A S Rao; Sathi Devi; Kaweh Mansouri; Carroll A B Webers Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-03-13 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ana Claudia F Suzuki; Leandro C Zacharias; Rony C Preti; Leonardo P Cunha; Mário L R Monteiro Journal: Eye (Lond) Date: 2019-09-18 Impact factor: 3.775
Authors: Harsha L Rao; Zia S Pradhan; Min Hee Suh; Sasan Moghimi; Kaweh Mansouri; Robert N Weinreb Journal: J Glaucoma Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 2.290
Authors: Bingyao Tan; Jacqueline Chua; Thiyagrajan Harish; Amanda Lau; Alfred Tau Liang Gan; Yar Li Tan; Damon W K Wong; Rachel Shujuan Chong; Marcus Ang; Rahat Husain; Leopold Schmetterer Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2019-10-04 Impact factor: 4.638