Accuracy of Combined GDx-VCC and Matrix FDT in a Glaucoma Screening Trial

PurposeTo assess the advantage in glaucoma screening of the use of scanning laser polarimetry with customized cornea compensation (GDx-VCC) combined with Matrix Frequency Doubling Technology (M-FDT) testing. MethodsIn a nonpopulation-based prepublicized trial, self-recruited white participants were screened for glaucoma with GDx-VCC, with M-FDT, and by independent clinical examination. Cases with possible glaucoma as found with any of the screening methods underwent a detailed clinical investigation to verify or exclude glaucoma. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, likelihood ratios, and predictive values were calculated using different threshold criteria for GDx-VCC alone, M-FDT alone, and for various combinations. ResultsOf the 233 attendees, 181 participants (345 eyes) successfully underwent the GDx-VCC and M-FDT measurements. Thirty-nine eyes of 24 participants had glaucoma (11.3% prevalence among eyes tested successfully). All but 2 of the glaucomatous eyes had only early damage. Evaluated separately, the criterion GDx-VCC NFI (normal threshold ≤30) performed best, with 97.0% specificity, 88.8% accuracy, and 25.6% sensitivity; but with only 8.5 positive likelihood ratio (PLR). For paired criteria, the best combination of GDx-VCC-screening test with M-FDT-screening test provided 99.6% specificity, 91.3% accuracy, and 28.6 PLR. For NFI combined with GDx-VCC nerve fiber bundle defect criterion, specificity was 99.0%, accuracy 89.6%, and PLR 18.0. However, the sensitivities in the 2 cases fell to 12.0% and 18.0%. For a triple combination of M-FDT-screening test with the latter pair of criteria, sensitivity increased to 41.7% and PLR (13.6) still remained clinically useful. ConclusionsIn a self-recruited white population with relatively high risk for mild glaucomatous damage, a combination of GDx-VCC together with M-FDT could usefully be employed for mass glaucoma screening.

[1]  N. Jansonius,et al.  Strategies for improving the diagnostic specificity of the frequency doubling perimeter. , 2005, Acta ophthalmologica Scandinavica.

[2]  R. Casson,et al.  Effect of Cataract on Frequency Doubling Perimetry in the Screening Mode , 2006, Journal of glaucoma.

[3]  Masaki Tanito,et al.  Diabetes-associated retinal nerve fiber damage evaluated with scanning laser polarimetry. , 2006, American journal of ophthalmology.

[4]  B. Bengtsson,et al.  A comparison of glaucoma patients identified through mass screening and in routine clinical practice. , 2002, Acta ophthalmologica Scandinavica.

[5]  H. Hussin,et al.  Clinical evaluation of frequency doubling technology perimetry using the Humphrey Matrix 24-2 threshold strategy , 2005, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[6]  M. C. Leske,et al.  Prevalence of open-angle glaucoma among adults in the United States. , 2004, Archives of ophthalmology.

[7]  F. Medeiros,et al.  Influence of disease severity and optic disc size on the diagnostic performance of imaging instruments in glaucoma. , 2006, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[8]  D. Friedman,et al.  Diagnostic capabilities of frequency-doubling technology, scanning laser polarimetry, and nerve fiber layer photographs to distinguish glaucomatous damage. , 2001, American journal of ophthalmology.

[9]  M. L. Salvetat,et al.  Frequency Doubling Technology Perimetry With the Humphrey Matrix 30-2 Test , 2006, Journal of glaucoma.

[10]  B. Reeves,et al.  Appraising evaluations of screening/diagnostic tests: the importance of the study populations , 2000, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[11]  V. P. Costa,et al.  Retinal nerve fibre layer loss in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus without retinopathy , 2002, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[12]  Wilson Mr.  Screening paradigms in glaucoma , 2001 .

[13]  Performance of glaucoma mass screening with only a visual field test using frequency-doubling technology perimetry. , 2002, American journal of ophthalmology.

[14]  Christian Y Mardin,et al.  Combined use of frequency doubling perimetry and polarimetric measurements of retinal nerve fiber layer in glaucoma detection. , 2003, American journal of ophthalmology.

[15]  M. Wilson.  Screening paradigms in glaucoma. , 2001, Journal of glaucoma.

[16]  R. P. Mills,et al.  Categorizing the stage of glaucoma from pre-diagnosis to end-stage disease. , 2006, American journal of ophthalmology-glaucoma.

[17]  N T Choplin,et al.  The sensitivity and specificity of scanning laser polarimetry in the detection of glaucoma in a clinical setting. , 2001, Ophthalmology.

[18]  M Zingirian,et al.  Learning effect, short-term fluctuation, and long-term fluctuation in frequency doubling technique. , 2000, American journal of ophthalmology.

[19]  H. Jampel,et al.  How Are Glaucoma Patients Identified? , 2003, Journal of glaucoma.

[20]  H. Quigley,et al.  Community screening for eye disease by laypersons: the Hoffberger program. , 2002, American journal of ophthalmology.

[21]  H. Lemij,et al.  Scanning laser polarimetry of the retinal nerve fiber layer in perimetrically unaffected eyes of glaucoma patients. , 2004, Ophthalmology.

[22]  Jacques Gresset,et al.  Validity of screening for glaucomatous optic nerve damage using confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (Heidelberg Retina Tomograph II) in high-risk populations: a pilot study. , 2005, Ophthalmology.

[23]  R P Mills,et al.  Screening for glaucoma with frequency-doubling technology and Damato campimetry. , 1999, Archives of ophthalmology.

[24]  K. Schulz,et al.  Uses and abuses of screening tests , 2002, The Lancet.

[25]  N. Jansonius,et al.  The Groningen Longitudinal Glaucoma Study. I. Baseline sensitivity and specificity of the frequency doubling perimeter and the GDx nerve fibre analyser. , 2005, Acta ophthalmologica Scandinavica.

[26]  Robert N Weinreb,et al.  Combining structural and functional testing for detection of glaucoma. , 2006, Ophthalmology.

[27]  T. Realini,et al.  Impact of diabetes on glaucoma screening using frequency-doubling perimetry. , 2004, Ophthalmology.

[28]  H. Quigley,et al.  The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020 , 2006, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[29]  Jill E Keeffe,et al.  Detection of undiagnosed glaucoma by eye health professionals. , 2004, Ophthalmology.

[30]  A. Antón,et al.  Prevalence of Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma in a Spanish Population: The Segovia Study , 2004, Journal of glaucoma.

[31]  G. Marchini,et al.  Prevalence of glaucoma and intraocular pressure distribution in a defined population. The Egna-Neumarkt Study. , 1998, Ophthalmology.

[32]  P. Aspinall,et al.  Sensitivity and specificity of frequency-doubling technology, tendency-oriented perimetry, and Humphrey Swedish interactive threshold algorithm-fast perimetry in a glaucoma practice. , 2002, American journal of ophthalmology.

[33]  G. Holló,et al.  Enhanced corneal compensation for scanning laser polarimetry on eyes with atypical polarisation pattern , 2005, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[34]  Impact of cataract on the results of frequency-doubling technology perimetry. , 2004, Ophthalmology.

[35]  Chris A. Johnson,et al.  Predictive Value of Frequency Doubling Technology Perimetry for Detecting Glaucoma in a Developing Country , 2005, Journal of glaucoma.

[36]  Hans G Lemij,et al.  Diagnostic accuracy of the GDx VCC for glaucoma. , 2004, Ophthalmology.

[37]  A. Hofman,et al.  Changing views on open-angle glaucoma: definitions and prevalences--The Rotterdam Study. , 2000, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[38]  H. Quigley.  Number of people with glaucoma worldwide. , 1996, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[39]  R. George,et al.  Frequency Doubling Perimetry in Glaucoma , 2002, Journal of glaucoma.

[40]  Philip P. Chen,et al.  Learning effects among perimetric novices in frequency doubling technology perimetry. , 2002, Ophthalmology.

[41]  N. Orzalesi,et al.  Detecting Glaucoma with Frequency-Doubling Technology Perimetry: A Comparison Between N-30 and C-20 Screening Programs , 2005, Journal of glaucoma.

[42]  R. O. Schultz,et al.  Accuracy of glaucoma detection with frequency-doubling perimetry. , 2000, American journal of ophthalmology.

[43]  Susana Molina-Castañer,et al.  Terminology and guidelines for glaucoma , 2009 .

[44]  A. Sommer,et al.  Racial variations in the prevalence of primary open-angle glaucoma. The Baltimore Eye Survey. , 1991, JAMA.

[45]  T Zeyen,et al.  Screening for Glaucoma in a General Population with the Non-Mydriatic Fundus Camera and the Frequency Doubling Perimeter , 2004, European journal of ophthalmology.

[46]  Jaewan Choi,et al.  Scanning laser polarimetry using variable corneal compensation in the detection of glaucoma with localized visual field defects. , 2005, Ophthalmology.

[47]  P. Brusini,et al.  Frequency doubling technology perimetry for detection of glaucomatous visual field loss. , 2000, American journal of ophthalmology.

[48]  L. Zangwill,et al.  Detecting early glaucoma by assessment of retinal nerve fiber layer thickness and visual function. , 2001, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[49]  K. Schumacher,et al.  Generation of Renal Tubules at the Interface of an Artificial Interstitium , 2004, Cellular Physiology and Biochemistry.

[50]  G. Ravalico,et al.  Scanning laser polarimetry with variable corneal compensation and detection of glaucomatous optic neuropathy , 2005, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

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

[52]  F. Medeiros,et al.  Comparison of the GDx VCC scanning laser polarimeter, HRT II confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope, and stratus OCT optical coherence tomograph for the detection of glaucoma. , 2004, Archives of ophthalmology.

[53]  M. C. Leske,et al.  Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression: results from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. , 2002, Archives of ophthalmology.

[54]  R. Kaczmarek,et al.  Prevalence of Glaucoma in the Wroclaw Population. The Wroclaw Epidemiological Study , 2005, Ophthalmic epidemiology.