Predicting progression to glaucoma in ocular hypertensive patients

Journal of Glaucoma

Volumn 19, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 304-309

  Strouthidis, Nicholas G ^a,b   Gardiner, Stuart K ^b   Owen, Victoria M F ^c   Zuniga, Claudio ^a   Garway Heath, David F ^a,c  

^a MOORFIELDS EYE HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b CITY UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c DEVERS EYE INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

HRT; Optic disc; Progression; Visual field

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; DISEASE COURSE; GLAUCOMA; GLAUCOMA PROBABILITY SCORE; HUMAN; INTRAOCULAR HYPERTENSION; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MOORFIELDS REGRESSION ANALYSIS; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RISK; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; TOMOGRAPHY; VISUAL FIELD; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MIDDLE AGED; OCULAR HYPERTENSION; OPHTHALMOSCOPY; OPTIC DISK; PATHOLOGY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PROBABILITY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TIME; VISION DISORDERS; VISUAL SYSTEM EXAMINATION;

ADULT; AGED; DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES, OPHTHALMOLOGICAL; DISEASE PROGRESSION; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MIDDLE AGED; OCULAR HYPERTENSION; OPHTHALMOSCOPY; OPTIC DISK; PROBABILITY; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TIME FACTORS; TOMOGRAPHY; VISION DISORDERS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 77953969382     PISSN: 10570829     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e3181b6e5a1     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Rohrschneider K, Burk RO, Kruse FE, et al. Reproducibility of the optic nerve head topography with a new laser tomographic scanning device. Ophthalmology. 1994;101: 1044-1049.
2. Sihota R, Gulati V, Agarwal HC, et al. Variables affecting test-retest variability of Heidelberg Retina Tomograph II stereometric parameters. J Glaucoma. 2002;11:321-328.
3. Strouthidis NG, White ET, Owen VM, et al. Factors affecting the test-retest variability of Heidelberg Retina Tomograph and Heidelberg Retina Tomograph II measurements. Br J Ophthalmol. 2005;89:1427-1432.
4. Artes PH, Chauhan BC. Longitudinal changes in the visual field and optic disc in glaucoma. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2005;24: 333-354.
5. Strouthidis NG, Scott A, Peter NM, et al. Optic disc and visual field progression in ocular hypertensive subjects: detection rates, specificity, and agreement. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47:2904-2910.
6. Strouthidis NG, Garway-Heath DF. New developments in Heidelberg Retina Tomograph for glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2008;19:141-148.
7. Wollstein G, Garway-Heath DF, Hitchings RA. Identification of early glaucoma cases with the scanning laser ophthalmoscope. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:1557-1563.
8. Swindale NV, Stjepanovic G, Chin A, et al. Automated analysis of normal and glaucomatous optic nerve head topography images. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:1730-1742.
9. Zangwill LM, Weinreb RN, Beiser JA, et al. Baseline topographic optic disc measurements are associated with the development of primary open-angle glaucoma: the Confocal Scanning Laser Ophthalmoscopy Ancillary Study to the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123:1188-1197.
10. Kamal D, Garway-Heath D, Ruben S, et al. Results of the betaxolol versus placebo treatment trial in ocular hypertension. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2003;241:196-203.
11. AGIS. Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study. 2. Visual field test scoring and reliability. Ophthalmology. 1994;101:1445-1455.
12. Gardiner SK, Crabb DP. Examination of different pointwise linear regression methods for determining visual field progression. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43:1400-1407.
13. Garway-Heath DF, Poinoosawmy D, Fitzke FW, et al. Mapping the visual field to the optic disc in normal tension glaucoma eyes. Ophthalmology. 2000;107:1809-1815.
14. Burgansky-Eliash Z, Wollstein G, Bilonick RA, et al. Glaucoma detection with the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph 3. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:466-471.
15. Coops A, Henson DB, Kwartz AJ, et al. Automated analysis of Heidelberg Retina Tomograph optic disc images by glaucoma probability score. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47: 5348-5355.
16. De Leon-Ortega JE, Sakata LM, Monheit BE, et al. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of Heidelberg Retina Tomograph II and Heidelberg Retina Tomograph 3 to discriminate glaucomatous and nonglaucomatous eyes. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007;144:525-532.
17. Ferreras A, Pajarin AB, Polo V, et al. Diagnostic ability of Heidelberg Retina Tomograph 3 classifications glaucoma probability score versus moorfields regression analysis. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:1981-1987.
18. Harizman N, Zelefsky JR, Ilitchev E, et al. Detection of glaucoma using operator-dependent versus operator-independent classification in the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph-III. Br J Ophthalmol. 2006;90:1390-1392.
19. Oddone F, Centofanti M, Rossetti L, et al. Exploring the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph 3 diagnostic accuracy across disc sizes and glaucoma stages a multicenter study. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:1358-1365. 2008/03/07 ed.
20. Zangwill LM, Jain S, Racette L, et al. The effect of disc size and severity of disease on the diagnostic accuracy of the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph Glaucoma Probability Score. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2007;48:2653-2660.
21. Alencar LM, Bowd C, Weinreb RN, et al. Comparison of HRT-3 glaucoma probability score and subjective stereophotograph assessment for prediction of progression in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49:1898-1906.
22. O' Leary N, Mansberger SL, Twa MA, et al. Glaucomatous progression in series of Stereo-Paired Photographs and Heidelberg Retinal Tomography Images. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008;49:ARVO E-Abstract 5431.