12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Accuracy of optical coherence tomography (OCT) in pachymetry for glaucoma patients

      research-article
      ,
      BMC Ophthalmology
      BioMed Central
      Accuracy, Optical coherence tomography, Ultrasound pachymetry, Pachymetry

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Central corneal thickness (CCT) measurement has become an important test in the diagnosis and management of glaucoma. Currently, ultrasound corneal thickness measurement (pachymetry) is the most frequently used clinical technique and the gold standard to assess CCT. Newer instruments are currently available including the optical coherence tomography (OCT) instrument. The aim of the present study was therefore to evaluate the accuracy of the CCT measurements performed by three different observers, both with the OCT and ultrasound pachymetry (USP), in patients suffering from glaucoma.

          Methods

          Patients who had been previously diagnosed with glaucoma participated in this cross-sectional study. Glaucoma was defined as patients who had at least two repeatable Humphrey visual fields showing glaucoma damage using the software 24–2, and with the optic nerve showing typical glaucoma damage. The patients CCTs were measured with OCT and USP by three different examiners.

          Results

          Seventy eyes of 35 patients were included. The average age was 74 ± standard deviation (SD) 10.88, the average pachymetry value with OCT was 536 ± 29 μm, and the average pachymetry with USP was 532 ± 32 μm. The differences between OCT and USP were not significant ( t-test, p = 0.32). The intraclass correlation coefficients were, for OCT, 0.99 [confidence interval (CI): 0.98–0.996], and for USP, 0.97 (CI: 0.95–0.98).

          Conclusions

          Agreement among the three observers using OCT or USP for pachymetry measurements was good. OCT might be used as an alternative method for pachymetry in glaucoma patients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma.

          The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS) has shown that topical ocular hypotensive medication is effective in delaying or preventing the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) in individuals with elevated intraocular pressure (ocular hypertension) and no evidence of glaucomatous damage. To describe baseline demographic and clinical factors that predict which participants in the OHTS developed POAG. Baseline demographic and clinical data were collected prior to randomization except for corneal thickness measurements, which were performed during follow-up. Proportional hazards models were used to identify factors that predicted which participants in the OHTS developed POAG. In univariate analyses, baseline factors that predicted the development of POAG included older age, race (African American), sex (male), larger vertical cup-disc ratio, larger horizontal cup-disc ratio, higher intraocular pressure, greater Humphrey visual field pattern standard deviation, heart disease, and thinner central corneal measurement. In multivariate analyses, baseline factors that predicted the development of POAG included older age, larger vertical or horizontal cup-disc ratio, higher intraocular pressure, greater pattern standard deviation, and thinner central corneal measurement. Baseline age, vertical and horizontal cup-disc ratio, pattern standard deviation, and intraocular pressure were good predictors for the onset of POAG in the OHTS. Central corneal thickness was found to be a powerful predictor for the development of POAG.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Terminology and guidelines for glaucoma

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Measurement of central corneal thickness by high-resolution Scheimpflug imaging, Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography and ultrasound pachymetry.

              To compare the repeatability and reproducibility of central corneal thickness (CCT) measurements by high-resolution (HR) rotating Scheimpflug imaging and Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography (FD-OCT). CCT measurements were compared to those determined by ultrasound pachymetry (UP). In 35 healthy eyes, intra-observer repeatability for HR Scheimpflug (Pentacam) and FD-OCT (RTVue) systems was determined in consecutive images taken by an observer in the shortest time possible. Imaging was repeated again by a second observer to evaluate inter-observer reproducibility. The CCT measurements were compared among Scheimpflug, FD-OCT and UP images. Mean coefficients of repeatability were 0.48% for Scheimpflug and 0.26% for FD-OCT. For Scheimpflug, the coefficient of inter-operator reproducibility was 0.87%. For FD-OCT, the coefficient of inter-operator reproducibility was 0.45%. The CCT measurements by Scheimpflug, OCT and UP images were (mean ± standard deviation) 521.7 ± 27.6 μm, 510.8 ± 28.6 μm and 516.5 ± 27.6 μm, respectively. The differences between instruments were statistically significant. The 95% limits of agreement in CCT were -0.7 to 22.5 μm for Pentacam-OCT, -13.4 to 24.0 μm for Pentacam-UP and -26.7 to 15.4 μm for OCT-UP. There was a high degree of correlation between CCT measured by all 3 methods. Noncontact measurements of CCT with HR Scheimpflug and FD-OCT systems yielded excellent repeatability and reproducibility and can be used interchangeably. Although both devices were comparable with UP; in clinical practice, the measurements acquired by optical modalities are not directly interchangeable with UP measurements. © 2010 The Authors. Journal compilation © 2010 Acta Ophthalmol.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                +46-500-431000 , marcelo.ayala@vgregion.se
                robert.p.strandas@vgregion.se
                Journal
                BMC Ophthalmol
                BMC Ophthalmol
                BMC Ophthalmology
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2415
                29 September 2015
                29 September 2015
                2015
                : 15
                : 124
                Affiliations
                [ ]Eye Department, Skaraborgs Hospital, Skövde, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University & Karolinska Institute, 541 85 Skövde, Sweden
                [ ]Eye Department, Skaraborgs Hospital, Skövde, Sweden
                Article
                116
                10.1186/s12886-015-0116-x
                4589092
                26420690
                e7227fd4-1adb-4713-bf70-b9b774854045
                © Ayala and Strandås. 2015

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 9 January 2015
                : 21 September 2015
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2015

                Ophthalmology & Optometry
                accuracy,optical coherence tomography,ultrasound pachymetry,pachymetry

                Comments

                Comment on this article