Heidelberg Retina Tomograph in Glaucoma Case-finding


Serval ID
Inproceedings: an article in a conference proceedings.
Publication sub-type
Abstract (Abstract): shot summary in a article that contain essentials elements presented during a scientific conference, lecture or from a poster.
Heidelberg Retina Tomograph in Glaucoma Case-finding
Title of the conference
ARVO E-Abstract 249/A545
Wimmersberger Y., Bergin C., Oleszczuk J.D., Rivier D., Ferrini W., Achache F., Sharkawi E.
Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology
Fort Lauderdale
Publication state
Issued date
Purpose: To compare the disease classification using optic nerve head imaging against clinical examination combined with perimetry in the case-finding environment.Methods: During a glaucoma screening event at the University Hospital in Lausanne 148 attendees opted to undergo an extended screening exam consisting of perimetry with Octopus (Haag-Streit, Koeniz, Switzerland), tonometry, gonioscopy, slit-lamp optic nerve head examination and Heidelberg Retinal Tomorgraph (HRT, Heidelberg engineering). Classification criteria of an abnormal clinical exam consisted of a cup to disc ratio > 0.6, other disc abnormality (e.g. notching), closed angles, Van Herrick < ¼ and intraocular pressure >21mmHg. In perimetry a square root loss variance (sLV) >3.0 dB was considered abnormal. Those cases with both an abnormal clinical exam and abnormal perimetric results were considered to be glaucoma suspects. An abnormal HRT exam was a global Moorfields Regression Analysis (MRA) result of "outside normal limits". The results from the worse eye for each instrument are reported.Results: The mean age of the patients was 59.9 years (SD ±14.8years). 46 subjects failed the clinical exam. 55 subjects had sLV>3.0dB. 86 subjects failed one or more of the testing components, 21 subjects failed both the clinical exam and perimetry. Two cases of advanced glaucoma were diagnosed on the day of the event. 20 subjects were referred due to other ocular pathology (10 cataract; 2 AMD; 8 other). 16 subjects were outside normal limits with the HRT, of which 11 failed the clinical exam, 9 failed the perimetric exam and 7 failed all three. HRT had a sensitivity of 33% CI [15%,57%] with a specificity of 93% CI [87%,97%].Conclusions: HRT shows good specificity, however the low sensitivity makes it of limited use in the proposed case finding scenario.
Create date
21/01/2012 15:58
Last modification date
20/08/2019 15:37
Usage data