Literature DB >> 32493760

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

Manuele Michelessi1, Tianjing Li2, Alba Miele3, Augusto Azuara-Blanco4, Riaz Qureshi5, Gianni Virgili3.   

Abstract

AIMS: To assess the diagnostic accuracy (DTA) of optical coherence tomography (OCT) for detecting glaucoma by systematically searching and appraising systematic reviews (SRs) on this issue.
METHODS: We searched a database of SRs in eyes and vision maintained by the Cochrane Eyes and Vision United States on the DTA of OCT for detecting glaucoma. Two authors working independently screened the records, abstracted data and assessed the risk of bias using the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews checklist. We extracted quantitative DTA estimates as well as qualitative statements on their relevance to practice.
RESULTS: We included four SRs published between 2015 and 2018. These SRs included between 17 and 113 studies on OCT for glaucoma diagnosis. Two reviews were at low risk of bias and the other two had two to four domains at high or unclear risk of bias with concerns on applicability. The two reliable SRs reported the accuracy of average retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) thickness and found a sensitivity of 0.69 (0.63 to 0.73) and 0.78 (0.74 to 0.83) and a specificity of 0.94 (0.93 to 0.95) and 0.93 (0.92 to 0.95) in 57 and 50 studies, respectively. Only one review included a clear specification of the clinical pathway. Both reviews highlighted the limitations of primary DTA studies on this topic.
CONCLUSIONS: The quality of published DTA reviews on OCT for diagnosing glaucoma was mixed. Two reliable SRs found moderate sensitivity at high specificity for average RNFL thickness in diagnosing manifest glaucoma. Our overview suggests that the methodological quality of both primary and secondary DTA research on glaucoma is in need of improvement. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  diagnostic tests/investigation; glaucoma; imaging

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32493760      PMCID: PMC7876780          DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2020-316152

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


  34 in total

Review 1.  Case-control and two-gate designs in diagnostic accuracy studies.

Authors:  Anne W S Rutjes; Johannes B Reitsma; Jan P Vandenbroucke; Afina S Glas; Patrick M M Bossuyt
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2005-06-16       Impact factor: 8.327

Review 2.  Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence.

Authors:  Iain Chalmers; Paul Glasziou
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2009-06-12       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 3.  Discordances originated by multiple meta-analyses on interventions for myocardial infarction: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ersilia Lucenteforte; Lorenzo Moja; Valentina Pecoraro; Andrea A Conti; Antonio Conti; Elena Crudeli; Alessio Galli; Gian Franco Gensini; Martina Minnelli; Alessandro Mugelli; Riccardo Proietti; Jonida Shtylla; Roberto D'Amico; Elena Parmelli; Gianni Virgili
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2014-11-13       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  Completeness of Reporting of Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Based on the PRISMA-DTA Reporting Guideline.

Authors:  Jean-Paul Salameh; Matthew D F McInnes; David Moher; Brett D Thombs; Trevor A McGrath; Robert Frank; Anahita Dehmoobad Sharifabadi; Noémie Kraaijpoel; Brooke Levis; Patrick M Bossuyt
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2018-09-20       Impact factor: 8.327

Review 5.  Diagnostic accuracy of imaging devices in glaucoma: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Monica Fallon; Oliver Valero; Marta Pazos; Alfonso Antón
Journal:  Surv Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-01-14       Impact factor: 6.048

6.  Overlapping network meta-analyses on the same topic: survey of published studies.

Authors:  F Naudet; E Schuit; J P A Ioannidis
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 7.196

7.  The quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies of optical coherence tomography in glaucoma.

Authors:  Zoë K Johnson; M A Rehman Siddiqui; Augusto Azuara-Blanco
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2007-04-16       Impact factor: 12.079

8.  QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies.

Authors:  Penny F Whiting; Anne W S Rutjes; Marie E Westwood; Susan Mallett; Jonathan J Deeks; Johannes B Reitsma; Mariska M G Leeflang; Jonathan A C Sterne; Patrick M M Bossuyt
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Can Automated Imaging for Optic Disc and Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Analysis Aid Glaucoma Detection?

Authors:  Katie Banister; Charles Boachie; Rupert Bourne; Jonathan Cook; Jennifer M Burr; Craig Ramsay; David Garway-Heath; Joanne Gray; Peter McMeekin; Rodolfo Hernández; Augusto Azuara-Blanco
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2016-03-23       Impact factor: 12.079

10.  ROBIS: A new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed.

Authors:  Penny Whiting; Jelena Savović; Julian P T Higgins; Deborah M Caldwell; Barnaby C Reeves; Beverley Shea; Philippa Davies; Jos Kleijnen; Rachel Churchill
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2015-06-16       Impact factor: 6.437

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Risk factors for open-angle glaucoma and recommendations for glaucoma screening.

Authors:  Alexander K Schuster; Felix M Wagner; Norbert Pfeiffer; Esther M Hoffmann
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2021-04-21       Impact factor: 1.059

2.  The Natural History of Leber's Hereditary Optic Neuropathy in an Irish Population and Assessment for Prognostic Biomarkers.

Authors:  Kirk A J Stephenson; Joseph McAndrew; Paul F Kenna; Lorraine Cassidy
Journal:  Neuroophthalmology       Date:  2022-03-02

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

Review 4.  A deep dive into the latest European Glaucoma Society and Asia-Pacific Glaucoma Society guidelines and their relevance to India.

Authors:  Gowri J Murthy; Murali Ariga; Maneesh Singh; Ronnie George; Prafulla Sarma; Suneeta Dubey; Reena M Choudhry; Rajul Parikh; Manish Panday
Journal:  Indian J Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 1.848

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.