A geometric morphometric assessment of the optic cup in glaucoma.

The morphologic appearance of the optic disc is of interest in glaucoma. In contrast to descriptive classification systems that are currently used, a quantitative approach to the analysis of optic disc morphology is required. Our goal was to determine the optimal method for quantifying optic cup shape by comparing traditional (ovality, form-factor and neuroretinal rim (NRR) width ratio) and geometric morphometric approaches. Left optic disc stereophotographs of 160 (80 normal and 80 glaucomatous (stratified by severity)) subjects were examined. The optic cup margins were stereoscopically delineated with a custom tracing system and saved as a series of discrete points. The geometric morphometric methods of elliptic Fourier analysis (EFA) and sliding semi-landmark analysis (SSLA) were used to eliminate variation unrelated to shape (e.g. size) and yield a series of shape variables. Differences in optic cup shape between normal and glaucoma groups were investigated. Discriminant functions were computed and the sensitivity and specificity of each technique determined. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated for all methods and evaluated in their potential to discriminate between normal and glaucomatous eyes based on the shape variables. All geometric morphometric methods revealed differences between normal and glaucomatous eyes in optic cup shape, in addition to the traditional parameters of ovality, form-factor and NRR width ratio (p<0.0005). SSLA (minimum bending energy criterion--18 points) had the best sensitivity (83%) and area under the curve (AUC) (0.91). EFA (72 points) performed similarly well (74%, 0.89) as did the set of traditional shape-based variables (76%, 0.86). This study demonstrated that a geometric morphometric approach for discriminating between normal and glaucomatous eyes in optic cup shape is superior to that provided by traditional single parameter shape measures. Such analytical techniques could be incorporated into future automated optic disc screening modalities.

[1]  Rachel V North,et al.  Digital stereoscopic analysis of the optic disc: evaluation of a teaching program. , 2004, Ophthalmology.

[2]  Edward A Essock,et al.  Application of Shape-based Analysis Methods to OCT Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Data in Glaucoma , 2007, Journal of glaucoma.

[3]  B. Manly.  Randomization, Bootstrap and Monte Carlo Methods in Biology , 2018 .

[4]  Catherine M. Green,et al.  Heritable features of the optic disc: a novel twin method for determining genetic significance. , 2007, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[5]  A. Ferreras,et al.  Discriminating between normal and glaucoma-damaged eyes with the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph 3. , 2008, Ophthalmology.

[6]  Jost B. Jonas,et al.  Optic disc shape in glaucoma , 1996, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[7]  P. O'higgins,et al.  Discriminant function sexing of the mandible of indigenous South Africans. , 2008, Forensic science international.

[8]  Vii Avenue.  Discrimination of glaucomatous optic neuropathy by digital stereoscopic analysis , 2005 .

[9]  P A Sample,et al.  Detection of early glaucomatous structural damage with confocal scanning laser tomography. , 1998, Journal of glaucoma.

[10]  C. Klingenberg,et al.  Distances and directions in multidimensional shape spaces: implications for morphometric applications. , 2005, Systematic biology.

[11]  J. Gloster.  Vertical ovalness of glaucomatous cupping. , 1975, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[12]  L. Serra-Majem,et al.  Application of linear discriminant analysis to the biochemical and haematological differentiation of opiate addicts from healthy subjects: a case–control study , 2004, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

[13]  Charles R. Giardina,et al.  Elliptic Fourier features of a closed contour , 1982, Comput. Graph. Image Process..

[14]  Optic Nerve in Glaucoma , 1995 .

[15]  Jost B. Jonas,et al.  Variability of the real dimensions of normal human optic discs , 2005, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[16]  D. Slice,et al.  Mandibular shape in the genus Marmota (Rodentia, Sciuridae): A preliminary analysis using outlines , 2004 .

[17]  R V North,et al.  Digital imaging of the optic nerve head: monoscopic and stereoscopic analysis , 2005, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[18]  Brian G Richmond,et al.  Early Hominin Foot Morphology Based on 1.5-Million-Year-Old Footprints from Ileret, Kenya , 2009, Science.

[19]  D. Gíslason,et al.  Pleistocene genetic legacy suggests incipient species of Sebastes mentella in the Irminger Sea , 2009, Heredity.

[20]  V. Bernal,et al.  Differences between sliding semi‐landmark methods in geometric morphometrics, with an application to human craniofacial and dental variation , 2006, Journal of anatomy.

[21]  J. Jonas,et al.  Optic disc shape, corneal astigmatism, and amblyopia. , 1997, Ophthalmology.

[22]  F. James Rohlf,et al.  Geometric morphometrics: Ten years of progress following the ‘revolution’ , 2004 .

[23]  J. Hanley,et al.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. , 1982, Radiology.

[24]  F. Rohlf,et al.  Geometric morphometrics: Ten years of progress following the ‘revolution’ , 2004 .

[25]  Jost B. Jonas,et al.  Optic disc morphometry in chronic primary open-angle glaucoma , 1988, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[26]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. , 1979, Psychological bulletin.

[27]  Jonathan G. Crowston,et al.  Optic disc morphology - Rethinking shape , 2009, Progress in Retinal and Eye Research.

[28]  F. Bookstein.  Landmark methods for forms without landmarks , 1996 .

[29]  J. Jonas,et al.  Size of the optic nerve scleral canal and comparison with intravital determination of optic disc dimensions , 2005, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[30]  S M Drance,et al.  ROC analysis of Heidelberg Retina Tomograph optic disc shape measures in glaucoma. , 1997, Canadian journal of ophthalmology. Journal canadien d'ophtalmologie.

[31]  A. Cardini,et al.  Variation in guenon skulls (I): species divergence, ecological and genetic differences. , 2008, Journal of human evolution.

[32]  J. Jonas,et al.  Optic disc, cup and neuroretinal rim size, configuration and correlations in normal eyes. , 1988, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[33]  M. Zelditch,et al.  Geometric Morphometrics for Biologists , 2012 .

[34]  I. Marjanovic,et al.  The Optic Nerve in Glaucoma , 2011 .

[35]  F. Bookstein,et al.  Comparing frontal cranial profiles in archaic and modern Homo by morphometric analysis , 1999, The Anatomical record.

[36]  L. F. Marcus,et al.  A survey of multivariate methods for systematics , 1980 .

[37]  P. Gunz,et al.  Geometric Morphometrics , 2019, Archaeological Science.

[38]  F J Rohlf,et al.  On applications of geometric morphometrics to studies of ontogeny and phylogeny. , 1998, Systematic biology.

[39]  Fred L. Bookstein,et al.  Principal Warps: Thin-Plate Splines and the Decomposition of Deformations , 1989, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[40]  A. Ferreras,et al.  Optic nerve head changes in early glaucoma: a comparison between stereophotography and Heidelberg retina tomography , 2010, Eye.