Using optical imaging summary data to detect glaucoma.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity for discriminating between early to moderate glaucomatous and normal eyes using summary data reports from the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph (HRT), the GDx Nerve Fiber Analyzer (GDx), and the Optical Coherence Tomograph (OCT). DESIGN: Comparative cross-sectional study PARTICIPANTS: One eye each of 50 normal subjects and 39 glaucoma patients with early to moderate visual field damage (mean deviation, -5.04 +/- 3.32 dB; range, -0.85 to -13.2 dB). METHODS: Three experienced graders masked to patient identity and diagnosis evaluated each summary data report from the HRT, GDx, and OCT independently. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Each summary report was classified as either normal or glaucomatous. Sensitivity and specificity are reported for each grader, and agreement between graders is reported. RESULTS: For the HRT, sensitivity and specificity ranged from 64% to 75% and 68% to 80%, respectively. Agreement (kappa +/- standard error [SE]) between observers one and two, two and three, and one and three was 0.73 +/- 0.07, 0.77 +/- 0.07, and 0.67 +/- 0.08, respectively. For the GDx, sensitivity and specificity ranged from 72% to 82% and 56% to 82%, respectively. Agreement (kappa +/- SE) between observers one and two, two and three, and one and three was 0.66 +/- 0.08, 0.66 +/- 0.08, and 0.50 +/- 0.09, respectively. For the OCT, sensitivity and specificity ranged from 76% to 79% and 68% to 81%, respectively. Agreement (kappa +/- SE) between observers one and two, two and three, and one and three was 0.73 +/- 0.07, 0.58 +/- 0.08, and 0.51 +/- 0.09, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: When used alone, HRT, GDx, and OCT summary data reports can differentiate between normal and glaucomatous eyes with mild to moderate visual field loss. However, none of the instruments provided sensitivity and specificity that justify summary data reports being used as a screening tool for early to moderate glaucoma.

Detecting early glaucoma by assessment of retinal nerve fiber layer thickness and visual function.

PURPOSE: To compare the abilities of scanning laser polarimetry (SLP), optical coherence tomography (OCT), short-wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP), and frequency-doubling technology (FDT) perimetry to discriminate between healthy eyes and those with early glaucoma, classified based on standard automated perimetry (SAP) and optic disc appearance. To determine the agreement among instruments for classifying eyes as glaucomatous. METHODS: One eye of each of 94 subjects was included. Healthy eyes (n = 38) had both normal-appearing optic discs and normal SAP results. Glaucoma by SAP (n = 42) required a repeatable abnormal result (glaucoma hemifield test [GHT] or corrected pattern standard deviation [CPSD] outside normal limits). Glaucoma by disc appearance (n = 51) was based on masked stereoscopic photograph evaluation. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve areas, sensitivities, and specificities were calculated for each instrument separately for each diagnosis. RESULTS: The largest area under the ROC curve was found for OCT inferior quadrant thickness (0.91 for diagnosis based on SAP, 0.89 for diagnosis based on disc appearance), followed by the FDT number of total deviation plot points of < or =5% (0.88 and 0.87, respectively), SLP linear discriminant function (0.79 and 0.81, respectively), and SWAP PSD (0.78 and 0.76, respectively). For diagnosis based on SAP, the ROC curve area was significantly larger for OCT than for SLP and SWAP. For diagnosis based on disc appearance, the ROC curve area was significantly larger for OCT than for SWAP. For both diagnostic criteria, at specificities of > or =90% and > or =70%, the most sensitive OCT parameter was more sensitive than the most sensitive SWAP and SLP parameters. For diagnosis based on SAP, the most sensitive FDT parameter was more sensitive than the most sensitive SLP parameter at specificities of > or =90% and > or =70% and was more sensitive than the most sensitive SWAP parameter at specificity of > or =70%. For diagnosis based on disc appearance at specificity of > or =90%, the most sensitive FDT parameter was more sensitive than the most sensitive SWAP and SLP parameters. At specificity > or = 90%, agreement among instruments for classifying eyes as glaucomatous was poor. CONCLUSIONS: In general, areas under the ROC curve were largest (although not always significantly so) for OCT parameters, followed by FDT, SLP, and SWAP, regardless of the definition of glaucoma used. The most sensitive OCT and FDT parameters tended to be more sensitive than the most sensitive SWAP and SLP parameters at the specificities investigated, regardless of diagnostic criteria.

Discriminating between normal and glaucomatous eyes using the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph, GDx Nerve Fiber Analyzer, and Optical Coherence Tomograph.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the ability of 3 instruments, the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph (HRT), the GDx Nerve Fiber Analyzer (GDx), and the Optical Coherence Tomograph (OCT), to discriminate between healthy eyes and eyes with early to moderate glaucomatous visual field loss. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Forty-one patients with early to moderate glaucomatous visual field loss and 50 healthy subjects were included in the study. The HRT, GDx, and OCT imaging and visual field testing were completed on 1 eye from each subject within a 6-month interval. Statistical differences in sensitivity at fixed specificities of 85%, 90%, and 95% were evaluated. In addition, areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were compared. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the area under the ROC curve and the best parameter from each instrument: OCT thickness at the 5-o'clock inferior temporal position (mean +/- SE, 0.87 +/- 0.04), HRT mean height contour in the nasal inferior region (mean +/- SE, 0.86 +/- 0.04), and GDx linear discriminant function (mean +/- SE, 0.84 +/- 0.04). Twelve HRT, 2 GDx, and 9 OCT parameters had an area under the ROC curve of at least 0.81. At a fixed specificity of 90%, significant differences were found between the sensitivity of OCT thickness at the 5-o'clock inferior temporal position (71%) and parameters with sensitivities less than 52%. Qualitative assessment of stereophotographs resulted in a sensitivity of 80%. CONCLUSION: Although the area under the ROC curves was similar among the best parameters from each instrument, qualitative assessment of stereophotographs and measurements from the OCT and HRT generally had higher sensitivities than measurements from the GDx.

Laser in situ keratomileusis and photorefractive keratectomy for residual refractive error after phakic intraocular lens implantation.

PURPOSE: To determine the visual and refractive outcome of photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) and laser in situ keratomileusis (LASIK) in eyes with prior posterior chamber phakic intraocular lens implantation for high myopia. METHODS: We studied a series of 37 consecutive eyes of 31 patients who underwent LASIK or PRK for residual refractive error following collamer posterior chamber intraocular lens (IOL) (Staar Surgical Implantable Contact Lens) implantation into a phakic eye. Twenty-eight eyes had LASIK and nine eyes had PRK. Mean follow-up was 8.1 +/- 4.7 months after laser ablation (range, 3 to 18 mo). RESULTS: The preoperative mean spherical equivalent refraction prior to phakic posterior chamber IOL implantation was -17.74 +/- 4.89 D (range, -9.75 to -28.00 D). Following phakic IOL implantation and prior to LASIK or PRK, mean spherical equivalent refraction was -2.56 +/- 2.34 D (range, -0.25 to -8.75 D). One month following LASIK or PRK, mean spherical equivalent refraction was -0.24 +/- 0.52 D (range, -1.50 to +1.50 D), 3 months following LASIK or PRK, mean spherical equivalent refraction was -0.19 +/- 0.50 D (range, -1.50 to +1.00 D). The refraction was within +/-1.00 D of emmetropia in 36 eyes (97.2%) and within +/-0.50 D in 31 eyes (83.7%). Three eyes developed anterior subcapsular opacities several weeks after laser ablation, one eye developed macular hemorrhage 4 weeks after laser ablation, and one eye had corticosteroid induced ocular hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: LASIK or PRK can be used to treat the residual refractive error following posterior chamber phakic IOL implantation.