Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2024
Predicting perimetric defects from en face maps of retinal nerve fibre layer reflectance.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Swanson William H, King Brett J, Alluwimi Muhammed S, Malik Rizwan
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To develop criteria to predict visual hemifields with deep perimetric defects based on retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) reflectance, in a transparent process whose components can be assessed by independent laboratories analysing data from their own small groups.
METHODS: The analysis was carried out in four stages, using three independent groups of patients-30, 33 and 62 participants-with glaucoma and age-similar controls. The first stage used Group 1 to develop a criterion for RNFL reflectance images at 24, 36 or 48 μm below the inner limiting membrane (ILM). The second stage evaluated the criterion using Group 2. The third stage developed a second criterion to improve performance for Groups 1 and 2 combined. The fourth stage evaluated the second criterion with Group 3. Confidence intervals for sensitivity and specificity were then computed by combining results from all three groups.
RESULTS: The first criterion identified all hemifields with deep defects and no hemifields from controls, using a within-eye reference for healthy RNFL. For Group 2, specificity remained high but sensitivity was reduced. The second criterion improved sensitivity by using location-specific reference values. For Group 3, sensitivity remained high but reduced specificity was found. Confidence intervals showed substantial overlap for the two criteria.
CONCLUSIONS: We developed two criteria to identify patients with deep perimetric defects with high specificity and sensitivity. Several improvements are warranted: automated identification of the fovea-disc angle and optic disc locations, evaluation of normal variation in patterns of RNFL thickness, improved segmentation of ILM and major vasculature, reduction of within-eye variability in RNFL reflectance of healthy eyes, assessment of effects of image quality, assessment of effects of comorbidity and effectiveness of other devices.
METHODS: The analysis was carried out in four stages, using three independent groups of patients-30, 33 and 62 participants-with glaucoma and age-similar controls. The first stage used Group 1 to develop a criterion for RNFL reflectance images at 24, 36 or 48 μm below the inner limiting membrane (ILM). The second stage evaluated the criterion using Group 2. The third stage developed a second criterion to improve performance for Groups 1 and 2 combined. The fourth stage evaluated the second criterion with Group 3. Confidence intervals for sensitivity and specificity were then computed by combining results from all three groups.
RESULTS: The first criterion identified all hemifields with deep defects and no hemifields from controls, using a within-eye reference for healthy RNFL. For Group 2, specificity remained high but sensitivity was reduced. The second criterion improved sensitivity by using location-specific reference values. For Group 3, sensitivity remained high but reduced specificity was found. Confidence intervals showed substantial overlap for the two criteria.
CONCLUSIONS: We developed two criteria to identify patients with deep perimetric defects with high specificity and sensitivity. Several improvements are warranted: automated identification of the fovea-disc angle and optic disc locations, evaluation of normal variation in patterns of RNFL thickness, improved segmentation of ILM and major vasculature, reduction of within-eye variability in RNFL reflectance of healthy eyes, assessment of effects of image quality, assessment of effects of comorbidity and effectiveness of other devices.