Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of event-based analysis of glaucoma progression assessed subjectively on visual fields and retinal nerve fibre layer attenuation measured by optical coherence tomography

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose is to study the ability of an event-based analysis of retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) attenuation measured by Stratus® optical coherence tomography (OCT) and to detect progression across the spectrum of glaucoma. Adult glaucoma suspects, ocular hypertensives and glaucoma patients who had undergone baseline RNFL thickness measurement on Stratus OCT and reliable automated visual field examination by Humphrey’s visual field analyser prior to March 2007 and had 5-year follow-up data were recruited. Progression on OCT was defined by two criteria: decrease in average RNFL thickness from baseline by at least 10 and 20 µ. Visual field progression was defined by the modified Hodapp–Parrish–Anderson criteria. Absolute and percentage change in RNFL thickness from baseline was compared in progressors and non-progressors on visual fields. Concordance between structural and functional progression was analysed. 318 eyes of 162 patients were analysed. 35 eyes (11 %) progressed by visual fields, 8 (2.5 %) progressed using the 20 µ loss criterion, while 30 eyes (9.4 %) progressed using the 10 µ loss criterion. In glaucoma suspects, mean absolute RNFL attenuation was 8.6 µ (12.1 % of baseline) in those who progressed to glaucoma by visual fields. OCT was more useful to detect progression in early glaucoma, but performed poorly in advanced glaucoma. The 10 µ criterion appears to be closer to visual field progression. However, the ability to detect progression varies considerably between functional and structural tools depending upon the severity of the disease.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kerrigan-Baumrind LA, Quigley HA, Pease ME et al (2000) Number of ganglion cells in glaucoma eyes compared with threshold visual field tests in the same persons. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 41:741–748

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Wessel JM, Horn FK, Tornow RP et al (2013) Longitudinal analysis of progression in glaucoma using spectral-domain optical coherence tomography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 54(5):3613–3620

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Na JH, Sung KR, Lee JR et al (2013) Detection of glaucomatous progression by spectral-domain optical coherence tomography. Ophthalmology 120(7):1388–1395

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Leung CK, Yu M, Weinreb RN et al (2012) Retinal nerve fiber layer imaging with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography: patterns of retinal nerve fiber layer progression. Ophthalmology 119(9):1858–1866

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kaushik S, Pandav SS, Ichhpujani P et al (2011) Retinal nerve fiber layer measurement and diagnostic capability of spectral-domain versus time-domain optical coherence tomography. Eur J Ophthalmol 21(5):566–572

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sung KR, Kim DY, Park SB, Kook MS (2009) Comparison of retinal nerve fiber layer thickness measured by Cirrus HD and Stratus optical coherence tomography. Ophthalmology 116(7):1264–1270

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Vizzeri G, Weinreb RN, Gonzalez-Garcia AO et al (2009) Agreement between spectral-domain and time-domain OCT for measuring RNFL thickness. Br J Ophthalmol 93(6):775–781

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Knight OR, Chang RT, Feuer WJ, Budenz DL (2009) Comparison of retinal nerve fiber layer measurements using time domain and spectral domain optical coherent tomography. Ophthalmology 116(7):1271–1277

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wollstein G, Schuman JS, Price L et al (2005) Optical coherence tomography longitudinal evaluation of retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 123(4):464–470

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Stratus OCT Model 3000 User Manual (2003) Carl Zeiss Meditec, Dublin

  11. Mills RP, Budenz DL, Lee PP, Noecker RJ, Walt JG, Siegartel LR et al (2006) Categorizing the stage of glaucoma from pre-diagnosis to end-stage disease. Am J Ophthalmol 141:24–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Spaeth GL, Shieldds MB (2006) The stage of glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 141:147–148

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Budenz DL, Fredette MJ, Feuer WJ, Anderson DR (2008) Reproducibility of peripapillary retinal nerve fiber thickness measurements with stratus OCT in glaucomatous eyes. Ophthalmology 115(4):661–666

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Budenz DL, Michael A, Chang RT et al (2005) Sensitivity and specificity of the Stratus OCT for perimetric glaucoma. Ophthalmology 112:3–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Schuman JS, Hee MR, Puliafito CA et al (1995) Quantification of nerve fibre layer thickness in normal and glaucomatous eyes using optical coherence tomography. Arch Ophthalmol 113:586–596

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hoh ST, Greenfield DS, Mistlberger A et al (2000) Optical coherence tomography and scanning laser polarimetry in normal, ocular hypertensive, and glaucomatous eyes. Am J Ophthalmol 129:129–135

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lenth RV (2001) Some practical guidelines for effective sample size determination. Am Stat 55:187–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Wollstein G, Ishikawa H, Wang J et al (2005) Comparison of three optical coherence tomography scanning areas for detection of glaucomatous damage. Am J Ophthalmol 139:39–43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Johnson CA, Cioffi GA, Liebmann JR et al (2000) The relationship between structural and functional alterations in glaucoma: a review. Semin Ophthalmol 15(4):221–233

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Harwerth RS, Charles F (2008) Prentice Award Lecture 2006: a neuron doctrine for glaucoma. Optom Vis Sci 85:436–444

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Harwerth RS, Vilupuru AS, Rangaswamy NV, Smith EL 3rd (2007) The relationship between nerve fiber layer and perimetry measurements. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 48:763–773

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hood D, Kardon RH (2007) A framework for comparing structural and functional measures of glaucomatous damage. Prog Retin Eye Res 26:688–710

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Leung CK, Chiu V, Weinreb RN et al (2011) Evaluation of retinal nerve fiber layer progression in glaucoma: a comparison between spectral-domain and time-domain optical coherence tomography. Ophthalmology 118(8):1558–1562

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Grewal DS, Sehi M, Paauw JD, Greenfield DS (2012) Advanced imaging in glaucoma study group. Detection of progressive retinal nerve fiber layer thickness loss with optical coherence tomography using 4 criteria for functional progression. J Glaucoma 21(4):214–220

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Leung CK, Liu S, Weinreb RN et al (2011) Evaluation of retinal nerve fiber layer progression in glaucoma a prospective analysis with neuroretinal rim and visual field progression. Ophthalmology 118(8):1551–1557

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lee EJ, Kim TW, Park KH et al (2009) Ability of Stratus OCT to detect progressive retinal nerve fiber layer atrophy in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 50(2):662–668

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Leung CK, Cheung CY, Weinreb RN et al (2010) Evaluation of retinal nerve fiber layer progression in glaucoma: a study on optical coherence tomography guided progression analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 51(1):217–222

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Medeiros FA, Zangwill LM, Alencar LM et al (2009) Detection of glaucoma progression with stratus OCT retinal nerve fiber layer, optic nerve head, and macular thickness measurements. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 50(12):5741–5748

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Lee M, Yang H, Kim J, Ahn J (2013) Comparison of event-based methods using optical coherence tomography and automated perimetry to detect the progression of glaucoma in patients with open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmologica 229(2):106–112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Sihota R, Sony P, Gupta V et al (2006) Diagnostic capability of optical coherence tomography in evaluating the degree of glaucomatous retinal nerve fiber damage. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 47:2006–2010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Wollstein G, Kagemann L, Bilonick RA et al (2012) Retinal nerve fibre layer and visual function loss in glaucoma: the tipping point. Br J Ophthalmol 96(1):47–52

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Heijl A, Leske MC, Bengtsson B et al (2003) EMGT group. Measuring visual field progression in the early manifest glaucoma trial. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 81:286–293

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Antón A, Pazos M, Martín B, Navero JM, Ayala ME, Castany M, Martínez P, Bardavío J (2013) Glaucoma progression detection: agreement, sensitivity, and specificity of expert visual field evaluation, event analysis, and trend analysis. Eur J Ophthalmol 23(2):187–195

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Tanna AP, Budenz DL, Bandi J et al (2012) Glaucoma progression analysis software compared with expert consensus opinion in the detection of visual field progression in glaucoma. Ophthalmology 119(3):468–473

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Heijl A, Bengtsson B, Chauhan BC et al (2008) A comparison of visual field progression criteria of 3 major glaucoma trials in early manifest glaucoma trial patients. Ophthalmology 115:1557–1565

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Vesti E, Johnson CA, Chauhan BC (2003) Comparison of different methods for detecting glaucomatous visual field progression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 44:3873–3879

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None of the authors has conflict of interest with the submission.

Financial support

No financial support was received for this submission.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Advanced Eye Centre, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, 160012, India

    Sushmita Kaushik, Samyak Mulkutkar, Surinder Singh Pandav, Neelam Verma & Amod Gupta

Authors
  1. Sushmita Kaushik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samyak Mulkutkar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Surinder Singh Pandav
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Neelam Verma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Amod Gupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sushmita Kaushik.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kaushik, S., Mulkutkar, S., Pandav, S.S. et al. Comparison of event-based analysis of glaucoma progression assessed subjectively on visual fields and retinal nerve fibre layer attenuation measured by optical coherence tomography. Int Ophthalmol 35, 95–106 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-014-0028-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-014-0028-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation