Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2021
Evaluation of ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer thickness in the diagnosis of preperimetric glaucoma and comparison to retinal nerve fiber layer.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Deshpande Gunjan A, Gupta Richa, Bawankule Prashant, Raje Dhananjay, Chakraborty Moumita
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic ability of optic nerve head (ONH), RNFL, and GC-IPL parameters in differentiating eyes with PPG from normals.
METHODS: This was a retrospective, cross-sectional, observational study. We studied 73 eyes of 41 patients and compared them to 65 eyes of 34 normal persons. Each patient underwent detailed ocular examination, standard automated perimetry, GC-IPL, ONH, and RNFL analysis. PPG was defined as eyes with normal visual field results and one or more localized RNFL defects that were associated with a glaucomatous disc appearance (e.g., notching or thinning of neuroretinal rim) and IOP more than 21 mm Hg. Diagnostic abilities of GC-IPL, ONH, and RNFL parameters were computed using area under receiver-operating curve (AUROC), sensitivity and specificity, and likelihood ratios (LRs).
RESULTS: All GC-IPL parameters differed significantly from normal. The ONH, RNFL, and GC-IPL parameters with best area under curves (AUCs) to differentiate PPG were vertical cup to disc ratio (0.76), inferior quadrant RNFL thickness (0.79), and inferotemporal quadrant GC-IPL thickness (0.73), respectively. Similarly, best LRs were found for clock hour 5, 6, and 12 thicknesses among RNFL; inferior sector and inferotemporal sector thicknesses among GC-IPL parameters.
CONCLUSION: Diagnostic abilities of GC-IPL parameters were comparable to RNFL parameters in differentiating PPG patients from normals. The likelihood of ruling in a disease was greater with GC-IPL parameters.
METHODS: This was a retrospective, cross-sectional, observational study. We studied 73 eyes of 41 patients and compared them to 65 eyes of 34 normal persons. Each patient underwent detailed ocular examination, standard automated perimetry, GC-IPL, ONH, and RNFL analysis. PPG was defined as eyes with normal visual field results and one or more localized RNFL defects that were associated with a glaucomatous disc appearance (e.g., notching or thinning of neuroretinal rim) and IOP more than 21 mm Hg. Diagnostic abilities of GC-IPL, ONH, and RNFL parameters were computed using area under receiver-operating curve (AUROC), sensitivity and specificity, and likelihood ratios (LRs).
RESULTS: All GC-IPL parameters differed significantly from normal. The ONH, RNFL, and GC-IPL parameters with best area under curves (AUCs) to differentiate PPG were vertical cup to disc ratio (0.76), inferior quadrant RNFL thickness (0.79), and inferotemporal quadrant GC-IPL thickness (0.73), respectively. Similarly, best LRs were found for clock hour 5, 6, and 12 thicknesses among RNFL; inferior sector and inferotemporal sector thicknesses among GC-IPL parameters.
CONCLUSION: Diagnostic abilities of GC-IPL parameters were comparable to RNFL parameters in differentiating PPG patients from normals. The likelihood of ruling in a disease was greater with GC-IPL parameters.