Determining Optic Nerve Cupping Using Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) Versus a New Electronic Mobile Device. Issue 5 (May 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Sarmento, Andrea G.L.; Sarmento, Adriano; Souza, Luiz L.; Oliveira, Luiz A.; Rios, Marcus F.R.; Domingues, Thiago A.L.; Paula, Jayter S.; Lira, Rodrigo P.C.
• Is Part Of: Journal of glaucoma. Volume 28:Issue 5(2019)
• Publication Date: 2019-05
• Subjects: glaucoma -- cup-to-disc ratio -- optical coherence tomography -- telemedicine; Glaucoma -- Periodicals; 617.741005
• DOI: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000001139
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1057-0829

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose: We present a new device that may aid in glaucoma screening. The vertical cup-to-disc ratio (CDR) obtained from a new electronic mobile device (EMD) was compared with that obtained from a spectral-domain optical coherence tomography. In addition, results from examiner's evaluations were compared with the results mentioned above. Methods: A single-masked study was performed to evaluate the CDR results from 110 eyes from 110 subjects whose ages ranged between 18 and 60 years (39±13 y old), of whom 66 (60%) were female individuals. Vertical CDR was analyzed 5 times with each device in a single visit and evaluated by 3 different ophthalmologists. The Spearman correlation test and Bland-Altman analysis were used to evaluate the correlation and agreement between methods. Results: The CDR average using spectral-domain optical coherence tomography was 0.47±0.04, whereas the CDR average using EMD was 0.42±0.02. The clinical evaluation resulted in an average of 0.34±0.27. The Spearman test showed a strong correlation between vertical CDR obtained with both devices ( r =0.8319; P <0.0001) and between EMD and the examiners ( r =0.7156; P >0.001). Bland-Altman analysis showed good agreement between both devices as well as between EMD and the examiners (95% limits of agreement from −0.20 to 0.10 and from −0.15 to 0.30, respectively). Conclusions: We present a low-cost, reliable EMD that may serve as an alternative to subjectively measuring vertical CDR in face-to-face consultations and hence increase the general public's access to glaucoma screening. This may be especially useful for patients who live in remote areas.