Kitiya Ratanawongphaibul1, Edem Tsikata2, Michele Zemplenyi3, Hang Lee4, Milica A Margeta2, Courtney L Ondeck5, Janice Kim6, Billy X Pan7, Paul Petrakos8, Anne L Coleman9, Fei Yu10, Johannes F de Boer11, Teresa C Chen12. 1. Department of Ophthalmology, Glaucoma Service, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Glaucoma Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University and King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Thai Red Cross Society, Bangkok, Thailand. 2. Department of Ophthalmology, Glaucoma Service, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 3. Department of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Massachusetts General Hospital, Biostatistics Center, Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. Department of Ophthalmology, Glaucoma Service, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Ophthalmology, VA Boston Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 6. Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 7. Department of Ophthalmology, Glaucoma Service, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Beverly Hills Institute of Ophthalmology, Beverly Hills, California. 8. Department of Ophthalmology, Glaucoma Service, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Ophthalmology, New York Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, New York. 9. Department of Ophthalmology, Stein Eye Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, California. 10. Department of Ophthalmology, Stein Eye Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, California; Department of Biostatistics, UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, Los Angeles, California. 11. LaserLaB Amsterdam, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Vrijie Universiteit, and Department of Ophthalmology, Vrijie Universiteit Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 12. Department of Ophthalmology, Glaucoma Service, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. Electronic address: Teresa_chen@meei.harvard.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare onset times of glaucoma progression among different glaucoma tests: disc photography (DP), visual field (VF) testing, 2-dimensional (2D) retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness, and 3-dimensional (3D) spectral-domain (SD) OCT neuroretinal rim measurements. DESIGN: Prospective, longitudinal cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred twenty-four eyes of 124 patients with open-angle glaucoma. METHODS: Over a 5-year period, 124 patients with open-angle glaucoma underwent yearly DP, VF testing, SD OCT RNFL thickness scans, and optic nerve volume scans (Spectralis; Heidelberg Engineering), all performed on the same day. From high-density optic nerve volume scans, custom-built software calculated the minimum distance band (MDB) thickness, a 3D neuroretinal rim parameter. Patients were classified as glaucoma progressors or nonglaucoma progressors using event-based analysis. Progression by DP and VF testing occurred when 3 masked glaucoma specialists unanimously concurred. Progression by RNFL and MDB thickness occurred if change of more than test-retest variability was observed. Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed to analyze time-to-progression data. Kappa Coefficients were used to measure agreement of progressing eyes among methods. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time to glaucoma progression among all 4 methods. RESULTS: Global MDB thickness detected glaucoma progression in the highest percentage of eyes (52.4%) compared with DP (16.1%; P < 0.001) and global RNFL thickness (15.3%; P < 0.001). Global MDB thickness detected glaucoma progression earlier than either DP (23 months vs. 44 months; P < 0.001) or global RNFL thickness (23 months vs. 33 months; P < 0.001). Among MDB progressing eyes, 46.2% were confirmed simultaneously or later by other conventional methods. Agreement of glaucoma-progressing eyes for all 4 methods in paired fashion were slight to fair (κ = 0.095-0.300). CONCLUSIONS: High-density 3D SD OCT neuroretinal rim measurements detected glaucoma progression approximately 1 to 2 years earlier compared with current clinically available structural tests (i.e., DP and 2D RNFL thickness measurements).
PURPOSE: To compare onset times of glaucoma progression among different glaucoma tests: disc photography (DP), visual field (VF) testing, 2-dimensional (2D) retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness, and 3-dimensional (3D) spectral-domain (SD) OCT neuroretinal rim measurements. DESIGN: Prospective, longitudinal cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred twenty-four eyes of 124 patients with open-angle glaucoma. METHODS: Over a 5-year period, 124 patients with open-angle glaucoma underwent yearly DP, VF testing, SD OCT RNFL thickness scans, and optic nerve volume scans (Spectralis; Heidelberg Engineering), all performed on the same day. From high-density optic nerve volume scans, custom-built software calculated the minimum distance band (MDB) thickness, a 3D neuroretinal rim parameter. Patients were classified as glaucoma progressors or nonglaucoma progressors using event-based analysis. Progression by DP and VF testing occurred when 3 masked glaucoma specialists unanimously concurred. Progression by RNFL and MDB thickness occurred if change of more than test-retest variability was observed. Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed to analyze time-to-progression data. Kappa Coefficients were used to measure agreement of progressing eyes among methods. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time to glaucoma progression among all 4 methods. RESULTS: Global MDB thickness detected glaucoma progression in the highest percentage of eyes (52.4%) compared with DP (16.1%; P < 0.001) and global RNFL thickness (15.3%; P < 0.001). Global MDB thickness detected glaucoma progression earlier than either DP (23 months vs. 44 months; P < 0.001) or global RNFL thickness (23 months vs. 33 months; P < 0.001). Among MDB progressing eyes, 46.2% were confirmed simultaneously or later by other conventional methods. Agreement of glaucoma-progressing eyes for all 4 methods in paired fashion were slight to fair (κ = 0.095-0.300). CONCLUSIONS: High-density 3D SD OCT neuroretinal rim measurements detected glaucoma progression approximately 1 to 2 years earlier compared with current clinically available structural tests (i.e., DP and 2D RNFL thickness measurements).
Authors: Vahid Mohammadzadeh; Melodyanne Cheng; Sepideh Heydar Zadeh; Kiumars Edalati; Dariush Yalzadeh; Joseph Caprioli; Sunil Yadav; Ella M Kadas; Alexander U Brandt; Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2022-07-08 Impact factor: 3.048
Authors: Janice Kim; Clara J Men; Kitiya Ratanawongphaibul; Georgia Papadogeorgou; Edem Tsikata; Geulah S Ben-David; Hussein Antar; Linda Yi-Chieh Poon; Madeline Freeman; Elli A Park; Maria A Guzman Aparicio; Johannes F de Boer; Teresa C Chen Journal: Clin Ophthalmol Date: 2022-08-13
Authors: Milica A Margeta; Kitiya Ratanawongphaibul; Edem Tsikata; Michele Zemplenyi; Courtney L Ondeck; Janice Kim; Anne L Coleman; Fei Yu; Johannes F de Boer; Teresa C Chen Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2021-06-29 Impact factor: 5.258