Retinal nerve fiber layer evaluation of spectral domain optical coherence tomograph and scanning laser polarimeter to diagnose glaucoma

Optical coherence tomography for glaucoma diagnosis: An evidence based meta-analysis

Purpose

Early detection, monitoring and understanding of changes in the retina are central to the diagnosis of glaucomatous optic neuropathy, and vital to reduce visual loss from this progressive condition. The main objective of this investigation was to compare glaucoma diagnostic accuracy of commercially available optical coherence tomography (OCT) devices (Zeiss Stratus, Zeiss Cirrus, Heidelberg Spectralis and Optovue RTVue, and Topcon 3D-OCT).

Patients

16,104 glaucomatous and 11,543 normal eyes reported in 150 studies.

Methods

Between Jan. 2017 and Feb 2017, MEDLINE^®, EMBASE^®, CINAHL^®, Cochrane Library^®, Web of Science^®, and BIOSIS^® were searched for studies assessing glaucoma diagnostic accuracy of the aforementioned OCT devices. Meta-analysis was performed pooling area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) estimates for all devices, stratified by OCT type (RNFL, macula), and area imaged.

Results

150 studies with 16,104 glaucomatous and 11,543 normal control eyes were included. Key findings: AUROC of glaucoma diagnosis for RNFL average for all glaucoma patients was 0.897 (0.887–0.906, n = 16,782 patient eyes), for macula ganglion cell complex (GCC) was 0.885 (0.869–0.901, n = 4841 eyes), for macula ganglion cell inner plexiform layer (GCIPL) was 0.858 (0.835–0.880, n = 4211 eyes), and for total macular thickness was 0.795 (0.754–0.834, n = 1063 eyes).

Conclusion

The classification capability was similar across all 5 OCT devices. More diagnostically favorable AUROCs were demonstrated in patients with increased glaucoma severity. Diagnostic accuracy of RNFL and segmented macular regions (GCIPL, GCC) scans were similar and higher than total macular thickness. This study provides a synthesis of contemporary evidence with features of robust inclusion criteria and large sample size. These findings may provide guidance to clinicians when navigating this rapidly evolving diagnostic area characterized by numerous options.

Optic nerve head and fibre layer imaging for diagnosing glaucoma

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of glaucoma is traditionally based on the finding of optic nerve head (ONH) damage assessed subjectively by ophthalmoscopy or photography or by corresponding damage to the visual field assessed by automated perimetry, or both. Diagnostic assessments are usually required when ophthalmologists or primary eye care professionals find elevated intraocular pressure (IOP) or a suspect appearance of the ONH. Imaging tests such as confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy (HRT), optical coherence tomography (OCT) and scanning laser polarimetry (SLP, as used by the GDx instrument), provide an objective measure of the structural changes of retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) thickness and ONH parameters occurring in glaucoma.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of HRT, OCT and GDx for diagnosing manifest glaucoma by detecting ONH and RNFL damage.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched several databases for this review. The most recent searches were on 19 February 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included prospective and retrospective cohort studies and case-control studies that evaluated the accuracy of OCT, HRT or the GDx for diagnosing glaucoma. We excluded population-based screening studies, since we planned to consider studies on self-referred people or participants in whom a risk factor for glaucoma had already been identified in primary care, such as elevated IOP or a family history of glaucoma. We only considered recent commercial versions of the tests: spectral domain OCT, HRT III and GDx VCC or ECC.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We adopted standard Cochrane methods. We fitted a hierarchical summary ROC (HSROC) model using the METADAS macro in SAS software. After studies were selected, we decided to use 2 x 2 data at 0.95 specificity or closer in meta-analyses, since this was the most commonly-reported level.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 106 studies in this review, which analysed 16,260 eyes (8353 cases, 7907 controls) in total. Forty studies (5574 participants) assessed GDx, 18 studies (3550 participants) HRT, and 63 (9390 participants) OCT, with 12 of these studies comparing two or three tests. Regarding study quality, a case-control design in 103 studies raised concerns as it can overestimate accuracy and reduce the applicability of the results to daily practice. Twenty-four studies were sponsored by the manufacturer, and in 15 the potential conflict of interest was unclear.Comparisons made within each test were more reliable than those between tests, as they were mostly based on direct comparisons within each study.The Nerve Fibre Indicator yielded the highest accuracy (estimate, 95% confidence interval (CI)) among GDx parameters (sensitivity: 0.67, 0.55 to 0.77; specificity: 0.94, 0.92 to 0.95). For HRT measures, the Vertical Cup/Disc (C/D) ratio (sensitivity: 0.72, 0.60 to 0.68; specificity: 0.94, 0.92 to 0.95) was no different from other parameters. With OCT, the accuracy of average RNFL retinal thickness was similar to the inferior sector (0.72, 0.65 to 0.77; specificity: 0.93, 0.92 to 0.95) and, in different studies, to the vertical C/D ratio.Comparing the parameters with the highest diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for each device in a single HSROC model, the performance of GDx, HRT and OCT was remarkably similar. At a sensitivity of 0.70 and a high specificity close to 0.95 as in most of these studies, in 1000 people referred by primary eye care, of whom 200 have manifest glaucoma, such as in those who have already undergone some functional or anatomic testing by optometrists, the best measures of GDx, HRT and OCT would miss about 60 cases out of the 200 patients with glaucoma, and would incorrectly refer 50 out of 800 patients without glaucoma. If prevalence were 5%, e.g. such as in people referred only because of family history of glaucoma, the corresponding figures would be 15 patients missed out of 50 with manifest glaucoma, avoiding referral of about 890 out of 950 non-glaucomatous people.Heterogeneity investigations found that sensitivity estimate was higher for studies with more severe glaucoma, expressed as worse average mean deviation (MD): 0.79 (0.74 to 0.83) for MD < -6 db versus 0.64 (0.60 to 0.69) for MD ≥ -6 db, at a similar summary specificity (0.93, 95% CI 0.92 to 0.94 and, respectively, 0.94; 95% CI 0.93 to 0.95; P < 0.0001 for the difference in relative DOR).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The accuracy of imaging tests for detecting manifest glaucoma was variable across studies, but overall similar for different devices. Accuracy may have been overestimated due to the case-control design, which is a serious limitation of the current evidence base.We recommend that further diagnostic accuracy studies are carried out on patients selected consecutively at a defined step of the clinical pathway, providing a description of risk factors leading to referral and bearing in mind the consequences of false positives and false negatives in the setting in which the diagnostic question is made. Future research should report accuracy for each threshold of these continuous measures, or publish raw data.

Factors affecting the ability of the spectral domain optical coherence tomograph to detect photographic retinal nerve fiber layer defects

Purpose

To evaluate the ability of normative database classification (color-coded maps) of spectral domain optical coherence tomograph (SDOCT) in detecting wedge shaped retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) defects identified on photographs and the factors affecting the ability of SDOCT in detecting these RNFL defects.

Methods

In a cross-sectional study, 238 eyes (476 RNFL quadrants) of 172 normal subjects and 85 eyes (103 RNFL quadrants with wedge shaped RNFL defects) of 66 glaucoma patients underwent RNFL imaging with SDOCT. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate the factors associated with false positive and false negative RNFL classifications of the color-coded maps of SDOCT.

Results

False positive classification at a p value of <5% was seen in 108 of 476 quadrants (22.8%). False negative classification at a p value of <5% was seen in 16 of 103 quadrants (15.5%). Of the 103 quadrants with RNFL defects, 64 showed a corresponding VF defect in the opposite hemisphere and 39 were preperimetric. Higher signal strength index (SSI) of the scan was less likely to have a false positive classification (odds ratio: 0.97, p = 0.01). Presence of an associated visual field defect (odds ratio: 0.17, p = 0.01) and inferior quadrant RNFL defects as compared to superior (odds ratio: 0.24, p = 0.04) were less likely to show false negative classifications.

Conclusions

Scans with lower signal strengths were more likely to show false positive RNFL classifications, and preperimetric and superior quadrant RNFL defects were more likely to show false negative classifications on color-coded maps of SDOCT.

Peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer assessment of spectral domain optical coherence tomography and scanning laser polarimetry to diagnose preperimetric glaucoma

Purpose

To compare the abilities of peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) parameters of spectral domain optical coherence tomograph (SDOCT) and scanning laser polarimeter (GDx enhanced corneal compensation; ECC) in detecting preperimetric glaucoma.

Methods

In a cross-sectional study, 35 preperimetric glaucoma eyes (32 subjects) and 94 control eyes (74 subjects) underwent digital optic disc photography and RNFL imaging with SDOCT and GDx ECC. Ability of RNFL parameters of SDOCT and GDx ECC to discriminate preperimetric glaucoma eyes from control eyes was compared using area under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC), sensitivities at fixed specificities and likelihood ratios (LR).

Results

AUC of the global average RNFL thickness of SDOCT (0.786) was significantly greater (p<0.001) than that of GDx ECC (0.627). Sensitivities at 95% specificity of the corresponding parameters were 20% and 8.6% respectively. AUCs of the inferior, superior and temporal quadrant RNFL thickness parameters of SDOCT were also significantly (p<0.05) greater than the respective RNFL parameters of GDx ECC. LRs of outside normal limits category of SDOCT parameters ranged between 3.3 and 4.0 while the same of GDx ECC parameters ranged between 1.2 and 2.1. LRs of within normal limits category of SDOCT parameters ranged between 0.4 and 0.7 while the same of GDx ECC parameters ranged between 0.7 and 1.0.

Conclusions

Abilities of the RNFL parameters of SDOCT and GDx ECC to diagnose preperimetric glaucoma were only moderate. Diagnostic abilities of the RNFL parameters of SDOCT were significantly better than that of GDx ECC in preperimetric glaucoma.