Ophthalmology
Volume 117, Issue 9 , Pages 1692-1699.e1 , September 2010

Comparison of Different Spectral Domain Optical Coherence Tomography Scanning Areas for Glaucoma Diagnosis

  • Harsha L. Rao, MD, DNB

      Affiliations

    • Hamilton Glaucoma Center, Department of Ophthalmology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California
    • L V Prasad Eye Institute, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, India
    • ,
  • Linda M. Zangwill, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Hamilton Glaucoma Center, Department of Ophthalmology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California
    • ,
  • Robert N. Weinreb, MD

      Affiliations

    • Hamilton Glaucoma Center, Department of Ophthalmology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California
    • ,
  • Pamela A. Sample, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Hamilton Glaucoma Center, Department of Ophthalmology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California
    • ,
  • Luciana M. Alencar, MD

      Affiliations

    • Hamilton Glaucoma Center, Department of Ophthalmology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California
    • Department of Ophthalmology, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
    • ,
  • Felipe A. Medeiros, MD, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Hamilton Glaucoma Center, Department of Ophthalmology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorrespondence: Felipe A. Medeiros, Hamilton Glaucoma Center, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA 92093-0946

Received 15 September 2009 ,Revised 14 January 2010 ,Accepted 15 January 2010.

References 

  1. Medeiros FA, Zangwill LM, Bowd C, et al. Evaluation of retinal nerve fiber layer, optic nerve head, and macular thickness measurements for glaucoma detection using optical coherence tomography. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005;139:44–55
  2. Wollstein G, Ishikawa H, Wang J, et al. Comparison of three optical coherence tomography scanning areas for detection of glaucomatous damage. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005;139:39–43
  3. Manassakorn A, Nouri-Mahdavi K, Caprioli J. Comparison of retinal nerve fiber layer thickness and optic disk algorithms with optical coherence tomography to detect glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;141:105–115
  4. Hougaard JL, Heijl A, Bengtsson B. Glaucoma detection by Stratus OCT. J Glaucoma. 2007;16:302–306
  5. Naithani P, Sihota R, Sony P, et al. Evaluation of optical coherence tomography and Heidelberg retinal tomography parameters in detecting early and moderate glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48:3138–3145
  6. Parikh RS, Parikh S, Sekhar GC, et al. Diagnostic capability of optical coherence tomography (Stratus OCT 3) in early glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:2238–2243
  7. Nouri-Mahdavi K, Nikkhou K, Hoffman DC, et al. Detection of early glaucoma with optical coherence tomography (StratusOCT). J Glaucoma. 2008;17:183–188
  8. Wollstein G, Schuman JS, Price LL, et al. Optical coherence tomography longitudinal evaluation of retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123:464–470
  9. Lee EJ, Kim TW, Park KH, et al. Ability of Stratus OCT to detect progressive retinal nerve fiber layer atrophy in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50:662–668
  10. Medeiros FA, Zangwill LM, Alencar LM, et al. Detection of glaucoma progression with Stratus OCT retinal nerve fiber layer, optic nerve head and macular thickness measurements. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50:5741–5748
  11. Nassif N, Cense B, park B, et al. In vivo high-resolution video-rate spectral-domain optical coherence tomography of the human retina and optic nerve. Opt Express. 2004;12:367–376[serial online] http://www.opticsinfobase.org/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-12-3-367Accessed December 20, 2009
  12. Wojtkowski M, Srinivasan V, Ko T, et al. Ultrahigh-resolution, high-speed, Fourier domain optical coherence tomography and methods for dispersion compensation. Opt Express. 2004;12:2404–2422[serial online] http://www.opticsinfobase.org/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-12-11-2404Accessed December 20, 2009
  13. Sehi M, Grewal DS, Sheets CW, Greenfield DS. Diagnostic ability of Fourier-domain vs time-domain optical coherence tomography for glaucoma detection. Am J Ophthalmol. 2009;148:597–605
  14. Pepe MS. The Statistical Evaluation of Medical Tests for Classification and Prediction. In: Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2003;p. 130–167Oxford Statistical Science Series. vol 28
  15. Zhou XH, Obuchowski NA, McClish DK. Statistical Methods in Diagnostic Medicine. In: New York: Wiley-Interscience; 2002;p. 274–306Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics
  16. Glynn RJ, Rosner B. Accounting for the correlation between fellow eyes in regression analysis. Arch Ophthalmol. 1992;110:381–387
  17. Alonzo TA, Pepe MS. Distribution-free ROC analysis using binary regression techniques. Biostatistics. 2002;3:421–432
  18. Girkin CA, McGwin G, Long C, et al. Subjective and objective optic nerve assessment in African Americans and whites. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45:2272–2278
  19. Zelefsky JR, Harizman N, Mora R, et al. Assessment of a race-specific normative HRT-III database to differentiate glaucomatous from normal eyes. J Glaucoma. 2006;15:548–551
  20. De Leon-Ortega JE, Sakata LM, Monheit BE, et al. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of Heidelberg Retina Tomograph II and Heidelberg Retina Tomograph 3 to discriminate glaucomatous and nonglaucomatous eyes. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007;144:525–532
  21. Medeiros FA, Vizzeri G, Zangwill LM, et al. Comparison of retinal nerve fiber layer and optic disc imaging for diagnosing glaucoma in patients suspected of having the disease. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:1340–1346
  22. Tan O, Chopra V, Lu AT, et al. Detection of macular ganglion cell loss in glaucoma by Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography. Ophthalmology. 2009;116:2305–2314
  23. Jaeschke R, Guyatt G, Sackett DL, et al. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group Users' guides to the medical literature (III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test). A. Are the results of the study valid? JAMA. 1994;271:389–391
  24. van der Schouw YT, Verbeek AL, Ruijs SH. Guidelines for the assessment of new diagnostic tests. Invest Radiol. 1995;30:334–340
  25. Medeiros FA. How should diagnostic tests be evaluated in glaucoma?. Br J Ophthalmol. 2007;91:273–274
  26. Medeiros FA, Ng D, Zangwill LM, et al. The effects of study design and spectrum bias on the evaluation of diagnostic accuracy of confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48:214–222
  27. Lijmer JG, Mol BW, Heisterkamp S, et al. Empirical evidence of design-related bias in studies of diagnostic tests. JAMA. 1999;282:1061–1066
  28. Mowatt G, Burr JM, Cook JA, et al. OAG Screening Project Screening tests for detecting open-angle glaucoma: systematic review and meta-analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49:5373–5385
  29. Zhang J, Quan H, Ng J, Stepanavage ME. Some statistical methods for multiple endpoints in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1997;18:204–221
  30. Savitz DA, Olshan AF. Multiple comparisons and related issues in the interpretation of epidemiologic data. Am J Epidemiol. 1995;142:904–908
  31. Sankoh AJ, Huque MF, Dubey SD. Some comments on frequently used multiple endpoint adjustment methods in clinical trials. Stat Med. 1997;16:2529–2542
  32. Perneger TV. What's wrong with Bonferroni adjustments. BMJ. 1998;316:1236–1238
  33. Rothman KJ. No adjustments are needed for multiple comparisons. Epidemiology. 1990;1:43–46

 Manuscript no. 2009-1274.

 Financial Disclosure(s): Linda M. Zangwill – Grant/Financial Support - Heidelberg Engineering, Carl Zeiss, OptovueRobert N. Weinreb – Consultant, Grant/Financial Support - Optovue, Topcon, Carl Zeiss; Grant/Financial Support - Heidelberg EngineeringPamela A. Sample – Grant/Financial Support - Carl Zeiss, Heidelberg Engineering, Welch AllynFelipe A. Medeiros – Consultant, Grant/Financial Support - Carl Zeiss; Lecture Fees - Heidelberg Engineering

 Supported in part by NEI EY08208 (PAS), NEI EY11008 (LMZ), Participant retention incentive grants in the form of glaucoma medication at no cost (Alcon Laboratories Inc., Allergan, Pfizer Inc., SANTEN Inc.).

PII: S0161-6420(10)00060-6

doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.01.031

Ophthalmology
Volume 117, Issue 9 , Pages 1692-1699.e1 , September 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution