Discrimination of glaucomatous optic neuropathy by digital stereoscopic analysis.

PURPOSE To evaluate the diagnostic power of a novel digital stereoscopic imaging system in the diagnosis of glaucomatous optic neuropathy. DESIGN Prospective cross-sectional analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of digital stereoscopic optic disc analysis in the diagnosis of glaucomatous optic neuropathy exhibiting mild to moderate field loss. PARTICIPANTS Fifty-two patients with open-angle glaucoma and 54 normal individuals were recruited. The presence of a reproducible visual field loss characteristic of glaucoma was used as the reference standard for the presence of glaucoma independent of the optic nerve head appearance. Patients were excluded if the optic disc, fundus, or visual field indicated other disease. One eye from each patient and individual was included in the study, the eye with the least field loss and a randomly designated normal eye, respectively. METHODS Simultaneous stereoscopic optic disc photography was performed on each specified eye. Three experienced observers viewed the resultant stereoscopic image of each nerve head using a Z screen, recorded a subjective clinical diagnosis, and undertook digital stereoscopic planimetry. Separate linear regression analysis was performed, post hoc, from the planimetric results for each observer of the logarithm of neuroretinal rim (NRR) against optic disc area derived from each normal eye. Eyes with NRR areas below the 95th prediction interval of the normal cohort were then classified as glaucomatous. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Sensitivity and specificity for the detection of glaucomatous optic neuropathy. RESULTS With subjective stereoscopic analysis, sensitivity for glaucoma detection among the 3 observers was 80.8%, 76.9%, and 90.4%, with respective specificities of 94.4%, 79.6%, and 79.6%. Regression analysis of the NRR in 30 degrees segments gave sensitivities between 69.2% and 80.8% and specificities between 83.3% and 90.7%. A combination of the subjective and quantitative analysis did not significantly improve discrimination. CONCLUSIONS The subjective analysis of digital stereoscopic images provides a useful method for the discrimination of normal and glaucomatous optic nerves. Planimetric analysis does not significantly improve the diagnostic precision of this technique.

[1]  A. Rudnicka,et al.  Magnification characteristics of fundus imaging systems. , 1998, Ophthalmology.

[2]  S. Drance,et al.  The area of the neuroretinal rim of the optic nerve in normal eyes. , 1987, American journal of ophthalmology.

[3]  Douglas R. Anderson,et al.  Clinical Decisions In Glaucoma , 1993 .

[4]  Pratap Challa,et al.  Correlation among Retinal Thickness, Optic Disc, and Visual Field in Glaucoma Patients and Suspects: A Pilot Study , 2003, Journal of glaucoma.

[5]  A. Coleman,et al.  Comparison of optic nerve imaging methods to distinguish normal eyes from those with glaucoma. , 2002, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[6]  L. Zangwill,et al.  Glaucoma detection using scanning laser polarimetry with variable corneal polarization compensation. , 2003, Archives of ophthalmology.

[7]  R Varma,et al.  Agreement between clinicians and an image analyzer in estimating cup-to-disc ratios. , 1989, Archives of ophthalmology.

[8]  J Gloster,et al.  Use of photographs for measuring cupping in the optic disc. , 1974, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[9]  R. Susanna,et al.  Comparison of algorithms for detection of localised nerve fibre layer defects using scanning laser polarimetry , 2003, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[10]  R A Hitchings,et al.  Quantitative evaluation of the optic nerve head in early glaucoma , 1998, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[11]  A Heijl,et al.  Glaucoma Hemifield Test. Automated visual field evaluation. , 1992, Archives of ophthalmology.

[12]  L. Zangwill,et al.  Using optical imaging summary data to detect glaucoma. , 2001, Ophthalmology.

[13]  F W Fitzke,et al.  Measurement of optic disc size: equivalence of methods to correct for ocular magnification , 1998, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[14]  G. Wollstein,et al.  Identification of early glaucoma cases with the scanning laser ophthalmoscope. , 1998, Ophthalmology.

[15]  Measurement of optic disc size. , 1999, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[16]  R S Harwerth,et al.  Ganglion cell losses underlying visual field defects from experimental glaucoma. , 1999, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[17]  J. Jonas,et al.  Ophthalmoscopic evaluation of the optic nerve head. , 1999, Survey of ophthalmology.

[18]  James Edwards Morgan,et al.  Assessment of Digital Stereoscopic Optic Disc Images Using a Z Screen , 2002 .

[19]  S M Drance,et al.  Optic disk appearances in primary open-angle glaucoma. , 1999, Survey of ophthalmology.

[20]  G. Dunkelberger,et al.  Retinal ganglion cell atrophy correlated with automated perimetry in human eyes with glaucoma. , 1989, American journal of ophthalmology.

[21]  C J Barry,et al.  Neuroretinal rim measurement error using PC‐based stereo software , 2000, Clinical & experimental ophthalmology.

[22]  R. Newcombe,et al.  Interval estimation for the difference between independent proportions: comparison of eleven methods. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

[23]  J. M. Miller,et al.  Optic disc rim area is related to disc size in normal subjects. , 1987, Archives of ophthalmology.

[24]  K. Yogesan,et al.  Software for 3-D visualization/analysis of optic-disc images , 1999, IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine.

[25]  Gadi Wollstein,et al.  Optical coherence tomography measurement of nerve fiber layer thickness and the likelihood of a visual field defect. , 2002, American journal of ophthalmology.

[26]  D. Garway-Heath,et al.  Sources of bias in studies of optic disc and retinal nerve fibre layer morphology , 1998, The British journal of ophthalmology.