Comparison of Event-Based Analysis Versus Trend-Based Analysis in the Detection of Glaucoma Progression by Optical Coherence Tomography 3-Dimensional Rim Measurements.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Tamara D Scott, Maria A Guzman Aparicio, Kitiya Ratanawongphaibul, Hang Lee, Michele Zemplenyi, Edem Tsikata, Milica A Margeta, Courtney L Ondeck, Anne L Coleman, Fei Yu, Johannes F de Boer, Teresa C Chen
{"title":"Comparison of Event-Based Analysis Versus Trend-Based Analysis in the Detection of Glaucoma Progression by Optical Coherence Tomography 3-Dimensional Rim Measurements.","authors":"Tamara D Scott, Maria A Guzman Aparicio, Kitiya Ratanawongphaibul, Hang Lee, Michele Zemplenyi, Edem Tsikata, Milica A Margeta, Courtney L Ondeck, Anne L Coleman, Fei Yu, Johannes F de Boer, Teresa C Chen","doi":"10.1097/IJG.0000000000002573","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Precis: </strong>Compared to trend-based analysis, event-based analysis detects OCT structural progression in more patients and at an earlier timepoint. Using event-based analysis, MDB rim thickness detects progression more often than RNFL thickness.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To determine if event-based or trend-based analysis best detects glaucoma progression using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness and minimum distance band (MDB) neuroretinal rim measurements.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Over 5 years, 124 open-angle glaucoma patients had yearly dilated eye exams, disc photography, Humphrey visual field (HVF 24-2) testing, 2-dimensional (2D) OCT RNFL thickness measurements, and 3-dimensional (3D) OCT MDB rim measurements, all on the same day. One eye of each patient was analyzed, which was randomly selected if both eyes from a patient were eligible. Using global RNFL thickness and global MDB rim thickness, event-based progression was defined as change greater than normal aging change and expected inter-test variability. Trend-based analysis used linear regression with progression defined as rate of decline greater than age-related decline.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Average follow-up for the 124 open-angle glaucoma patients was 66.9±16.4 months. Event-based analysis was better than trend-based analysis, because it detected progression in more patients (15.3% by RNFL event-based analysis versus 8.1% by RNFL trend-based analysis, P=0.025; 52.4% by MDB event-based analysis versus 9.7% by MDB trend-based analysis, P<0.001) and earlier (RNFL: mean 28.8 months vs. 63.2 months; P<0.001; MDB: mean 30.7 months vs. 56.2 months; P<0.003) whether using MDB rim thickness or RNFL thickness. Using event-based analysis, MDB rim thickness detected progression more often than RNFL thickness (52.4% vs. 15.3%; P<0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to trend-based analysis, event-based analysis detected OCT structural progression in more glaucoma patients and at an earlier timepoint.</p>","PeriodicalId":15938,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Glaucoma","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Glaucoma","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0000000000002573","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Precis: Compared to trend-based analysis, event-based analysis detects OCT structural progression in more patients and at an earlier timepoint. Using event-based analysis, MDB rim thickness detects progression more often than RNFL thickness.

Purpose: To determine if event-based or trend-based analysis best detects glaucoma progression using spectral domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness and minimum distance band (MDB) neuroretinal rim measurements.

Methods: Over 5 years, 124 open-angle glaucoma patients had yearly dilated eye exams, disc photography, Humphrey visual field (HVF 24-2) testing, 2-dimensional (2D) OCT RNFL thickness measurements, and 3-dimensional (3D) OCT MDB rim measurements, all on the same day. One eye of each patient was analyzed, which was randomly selected if both eyes from a patient were eligible. Using global RNFL thickness and global MDB rim thickness, event-based progression was defined as change greater than normal aging change and expected inter-test variability. Trend-based analysis used linear regression with progression defined as rate of decline greater than age-related decline.

Results: Average follow-up for the 124 open-angle glaucoma patients was 66.9±16.4 months. Event-based analysis was better than trend-based analysis, because it detected progression in more patients (15.3% by RNFL event-based analysis versus 8.1% by RNFL trend-based analysis, P=0.025; 52.4% by MDB event-based analysis versus 9.7% by MDB trend-based analysis, P<0.001) and earlier (RNFL: mean 28.8 months vs. 63.2 months; P<0.001; MDB: mean 30.7 months vs. 56.2 months; P<0.003) whether using MDB rim thickness or RNFL thickness. Using event-based analysis, MDB rim thickness detected progression more often than RNFL thickness (52.4% vs. 15.3%; P<0.001).

Conclusions: Compared to trend-based analysis, event-based analysis detected OCT structural progression in more glaucoma patients and at an earlier timepoint.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Glaucoma
Journal of Glaucoma 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
10.00%
发文量
330
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Glaucoma is a peer reviewed journal addressing the spectrum of issues affecting definition, diagnosis, and management of glaucoma and providing a forum for lively and stimulating discussion of clinical, scientific, and socioeconomic factors affecting care of glaucoma patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信