Stuart K Gardiner1, Robert M Kinast2, Teresa C Chen3, Nicholas G Strouthidis4, Carlos Gustavo De Moraes5, Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi6, Jonathan S Myers7, Jin Wook Jeoung8, John T Lind9, Lindsay A Rhodes10, Donald L Budenz11, Steven L Mansberger2. 1. Devers Eye Institute, Legacy Health, Portland, Oregon. Electronic address: sgardiner@deverseye.org. 2. Devers Eye Institute, Legacy Health, Portland, Oregon. 3. Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts Eye & Ear, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom; Discipline of Clinical Ophthalmology and Eye Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 5. Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York. 6. Stein Eye Institute, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California. 7. Wills Eye Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 8. Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. 9. Glick Eye Institute, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana. 10. University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama. 11. Department of Ophthalmology, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
Abstract
PURPOSE: OCT scans contain large amounts of information, but clinicians often rely on reported layer thicknesses when assessing the rate of glaucomatous progression. We sought to determine which of these quantifications most closely relate to the subjective assessment of glaucoma experts who had all the diagnostic information available. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Eleven glaucoma specialists independently scored the rate of structural progression from a series of 5 biannual clinical OCT printouts. METHODS: A total of 100 glaucoma or glaucoma suspect eyes of 51 participants were included; 20 were scored twice to assess repeatability. Scores ranged from 1 (improvement) to 7 (very rapid progression). Generalized estimating equation linear models were used to predict the mean clinician score from the rates of change of retinal nerve fiber layer thickness (RNFLT) or minimum rim width (MRW) globally or in the most rapidly thinning of the 6 sectors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The correlation between the objective rates of change and the average of the 11 clinicians' scores. RESULTS: Average RNFLT within the series of study eyes was 79.3 μm (range, 41.4-126.6). Some 95% of individual clinician scores varied by ≤ 1 point when repeated. The mean clinician score was more strongly correlated with the rate of change of RNFLT in the most rapidly changing sector in %/year (pseudo-R2 = 0.657) than the rate of global RNFLT (0.372). The rate of MRW in the most rapidly changing sector had pseudo-R2 = 0.149. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of change of RNFLT in the most rapidly changing sector predicted experts' assessment of the rate of structural progression better than global rates or MRW. Sectoral rates may be a useful addition to current clinical printouts.
PURPOSE: OCT scans contain large amounts of information, but clinicians often rely on reported layer thicknesses when assessing the rate of glaucomatous progression. We sought to determine which of these quantifications most closely relate to the subjective assessment of glaucoma experts who had all the diagnostic information available. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Eleven glaucoma specialists independently scored the rate of structural progression from a series of 5 biannual clinical OCT printouts. METHODS: A total of 100 glaucoma or glaucoma suspect eyes of 51 participants were included; 20 were scored twice to assess repeatability. Scores ranged from 1 (improvement) to 7 (very rapid progression). Generalized estimating equation linear models were used to predict the mean clinician score from the rates of change of retinal nerve fiber layer thickness (RNFLT) or minimum rim width (MRW) globally or in the most rapidly thinning of the 6 sectors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The correlation between the objective rates of change and the average of the 11 clinicians' scores. RESULTS: Average RNFLT within the series of study eyes was 79.3 μm (range, 41.4-126.6). Some 95% of individual clinician scores varied by ≤ 1 point when repeated. The mean clinician score was more strongly correlated with the rate of change of RNFLT in the most rapidly changing sector in %/year (pseudo-R2 = 0.657) than the rate of global RNFLT (0.372). The rate of MRW in the most rapidly changing sector had pseudo-R2 = 0.149. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of change of RNFLT in the most rapidly changing sector predicted experts' assessment of the rate of structural progression better than global rates or MRW. Sectoral rates may be a useful addition to current clinical printouts.
Authors: Steven L Mansberger; Shivali A Menda; Brad A Fortune; Stuart K Gardiner; Shaban Demirel Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2016-11-04 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Felipe A Medeiros; Carolina P B Gracitelli; Erwin R Boer; Robert N Weinreb; Linda M Zangwill; Peter N Rosen Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2014-10-16 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Xinbo Zhang; Anna Dastiridou; Brian A Francis; Ou Tan; Rohit Varma; David S Greenfield; Joel S Schuman; David Huang Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2017-09-28 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Brad Fortune; Kelly N Ma; Stuart K Gardiner; Shaban Demirel; Steven L Mansberger Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 4.799