English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Precise optic disc size measurements based on anatomically exact disc margins are fundamental for a correct assessment of glaucoma suspects. Computerized imaging techniques, such as confocal-scanning-laser-tomography (CSLT), which applies operator defined boundaries and optical-coherence-tomography (OCT), which incorporates an alternative detectable landmark (Bruch’s-membrane-opening (BMO)), have simplified the planimetry of the optic disc and BMO-area, respectively. This study’s objectives are to compare both modalities for area and to define a threshold for macro-BMO using BMO-OCT.    Methods  Retrospectively, patients that simultaneously received CSLT and BMO-OCT scans were included. Their images were correlated and agreement was determined using Bland-Altman-analysis. The diagnostic power of a macro-BMO threshold using OCT was derived after creating a receiver-operating-characteristics-curve using the well-established analogous CSLT threshold (2.43 mm 2 ).    Results  Our study included 373 eyes with a median optic disc area by CSLT/ BMO-area by OCT of 2.56 mm 2  and 2.19 mm 2  respectively. The Bland-Altman-analysis revealed a systematic deviation with a diverging tendency with increasing area, which enabled the creation of the following mathematical relation: disc-area (CSLT)*0.73 + 0.3 = BMO-area (OCT). BMO-area of 2.19 mm 2  showed the best diagnostic power for identifying macro-BMOs using OCT (sensitivity: 75%, specificity: 86%).    Conclusions  Area measurements (CSLT optic disc area vs. BMO-area by OCT) showed a systematic deviation with a divergent tendency with increasing size. Our mathematical equation offers an estimated comparison of these anatomically diverse entities. Considering BMO-OCT´ anatomical accuracy, the 2.19 mm 2  threshold may improve discernment between glaucoma suspects and norm variants.

bmc ophthalmology

A comparison of optic disc area measured by confocal scanning laser tomography versus Bruch’s membrane opening area measured using optical coherence tomography