Comparison of peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer thickness measured by spectral vs. time domain optical coherence tomography

Current Eye Research

Volumn 36, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 125-134

  Hong, Samin ^a   Seong, Gong Je ^a   Kim, Sung Soo ^a   Kang, Sung Yong ^a   Kim, Chan Yun ^a  

^a Yonsei University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Glaucoma; Optical coherence tomography; Retinal nerve fiber layer; Spectral domain; Time domain

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LOW TENSION GLAUCOMA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OPEN ANGLE GLAUCOMA; OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY; PERIPAPILLARY RETINA NERVE CELL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RETINA NERVE CELL; RETINAL NERVE FIBER LAYER THICKNESS; SPECTRAL SENSITIVITY; VISUAL SYSTEM PARAMETERS;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BIOMETRY; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA, OPEN-ANGLE; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; LOW TENSION GLAUCOMA; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NERVE FIBERS; OPTIC DISK; RETINAL GANGLION CELLS; ROC CURVE; TOMOGRAPHY, OPTICAL COHERENCE; VISUAL FIELD TESTS; VISUAL FIELDS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79551529785     PISSN: 02713683     EISSN: 14602202     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/02713683.2010.533807     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Huang D, Swanson EA, Lin CP, et al. Optical coherence tomography. Science. 1991;254:1178-1181.
2. Hee MR, Izatt JA, Swanson EA, et al. Optical coherence tomography of the human retina. Arch Ophthalmol. 1995;113:325-332.
3. Jaffe GJ, Caprioli J. Optical coherence tomography to detect and manage retinal disease and glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 2004;137:156-169.
4. Greenfield DS, Weinreb RN. Role of optic nerve imaging in glaucoma clinical practice and clinical trials. Am J Ophthalmol. 2008;145:598-603.
5. Nassif N, Cense B, Park BH, et al. In vivo human retinal imaging by ultrahigh-speed spectral domain optical coherence tomography. Opt Lett. 2004;29:480-482.
6. Wojtkowski M, Bajraszewski T, Gorczyńska I, et al. Ophthalmic imaging by spectral optical coherence tomography. Am J Ophthalmol. 2004;138:412-419.
7. Chen TC, Cense B, Pierce MC, et al. Spectral domain optical coherence tomography: Ultra-high speed, ultrahigh resolution ophthalmic imaging. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123:1715-1720.
8. Sehi M, Greenfield DS. Assessment of retinal nerve fiber layer using optical coherence tomography and scanning laser polarimetry in progressive glaucomatous optic neuropathy. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;142:1056-1059.
9. Miglior S, Riva I, Guareschi M, et al. Retinal sensitivity and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness measured by optical coherence tomography in glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 2007;144:733-740.
10. Pagliara MM, Lepore D, Balestrazzi E. The role of OCT in glaucoma management. Prog Brain Res. 2008;173:139-148.
11. Chang RT, Knight OJ, Feuer WJ, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of time-domain versus spectral-domain optical coherence tomography in diagnosing early to moderate glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2009;116:2294-2299.
12. Knight OJ, Chang RT, Feuer WJ, et al. Comparison of retinal nerve fiber layer measurements using time domain and spectral domain optical coherent tomography. Ophthalmology. 2009;116:1271-1277.
13. Vizzeri G, Weinreb RN, Gonzalez-Garcia AO, et al. Agreement between spectral-domain and time-domain OCT for measuring RNFL thickness. Br J Ophthalmol. 2009;93:775-781.
14. Hong S, Ahn H, Ha SJ, et al. Early glaucoma detection using the Humphrey Matrix Perimeter, GDx VCC, Stratus OCT, and retinal nerve fiber layer photography. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:210-215.
15. Hong S, Moon JW, Ha SJ, et al. Evaluation of a new scoring system for retinal nerve fiber layer photography using HRA1 in 964 eyes. Korean J Ophthalmol. 2007;21:216-221.
16. Lee BL, Bathija R, Weinreb RN. The definition of normaltension glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 1998;7:366-371.
17. Budenz DL, Fredette MJ, Feuer WJ, et al. Reproducibility of peripapillary retinal nerve fiber thickness measurements with stratus OCT in glaucomatous eyes. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:661-666.
18. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1:307-310.
19. Brenner H, Kliebsch U. Dependence of weighted kappa coefficients on the number of categories. Epidemiology. 1996;7:199-202.
20. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159-174.
21. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology. 1982;143:29-36.
22. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1:307-310.
23. Ludbrook J. Statistical techniques for comparing measurers and methods of measurement: A critical review. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2002;29:527-536.
24. Moreno-Montañés J, Olmo N, Alvarez A, et al. Cirrus highdefinition optical coherence tomography compared with stratus optical coherence tomography in glaucoma diagnosis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010;51:335-343.
25. Cheung CY, Leung CK, Lin D, et al. Relationship between retinal nerve fiber layer measurement and signal strength in optical coherence tomography. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:1347-1351.
26. Wu Z, Huang J, Dustin L, et al. Signal strength is an important determinant of accuracy of nerve fiber layer thickness measurement by optical coherence tomography. J Glaucoma. 2009;18:213-216.