Miller Sarah E, Thapa Suman, Robin Alan L, Niziol Leslie M, Ramulu Pradeep Y, Woodward Maria A, Paudyal Indira, Pitha Ian, Kim Tyson N, Newman-Casey Paula Anne
School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Tilganga Institute of Ophthalmology, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Am J Ophthalmol. 2017 Oct;182:99-106. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2017.07.010. Epub 2017 Jul 19.
To compare cup-to-disc ratio (CDR) measurements from images taken with a portable, 45-degree nonmydriatic fundus camera to images from a traditional tabletop mydriatic fundus camera.
Prospective, cross-sectional, comparative instrument validation study.
Setting: Clinic-based.
A total of 422 eyes of 211 subjects were recruited from the Tilganga Institute of Ophthalmology (Kathmandu, Nepal). Two masked readers measured CDR and noted possible evidence of glaucoma (CDR ≥ 0.7 or the presence of a notch or disc hemorrhage) from fundus photographs taken with a nonmydriatic portable camera and a mydriatic standard camera. Each image was graded twice.
Effect of camera modality on CDR measurement; inter- and intraobserver agreement for each camera for the diagnosis of glaucoma.
A total of 196 eyes (46.5%) were diagnosed with glaucoma by chart review; 41.2%-59.0% of eyes were remotely diagnosed with glaucoma over grader, repeat measurement, and camera modality. There was no significant difference in CDR measurement between cameras after adjusting for grader and measurement order (estimate = 0.004, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.003-0.011, P = .24). There was moderate interobserver reliability for the diagnosis of glaucoma (Pictor: κ = 0.54, CI, 0.46-0.61; Topcon: κ = 0.63, CI, 0.55-0.70) and moderate intraobserver agreement upon repeat grading (Pictor: κ = 0.63 and 0.64, for graders 1 and 2, respectively; Topcon: κ = 0.72 and 0.80, for graders 1 and 2, respectively).
A portable, nonmydriatic, fundus camera can facilitate remote evaluation of disc images on par with standard mydriatic fundus photography.
比较使用便携式45度非散瞳眼底相机拍摄的图像与传统台式散瞳眼底相机拍摄的图像的杯盘比(CDR)测量值。
前瞻性、横断面、比较性仪器验证研究。
地点:基于诊所。
从蒂尔甘加眼科研究所(尼泊尔加德满都)招募了211名受试者的422只眼睛。两名盲法阅片者从使用非散瞳便携式相机和散瞳标准相机拍摄的眼底照片中测量CDR,并记录青光眼的可能证据(CDR≥0.7或存在切迹或视盘出血)。每张图像分级两次。
相机模式对CDR测量的影响;各相机在青光眼诊断方面的观察者间和观察者内一致性。
通过图表审查,共诊断出196只眼睛(46.5%)患有青光眼;在分级者、重复测量和相机模式方面,41.2%-59.0%的眼睛被远程诊断为青光眼。在调整分级者和测量顺序后,两台相机在CDR测量上没有显著差异(估计值=0.004,95%置信区间[CI],0.003-0.011,P=.24)。在青光眼诊断方面,观察者间可靠性中等(尼康:κ=0.54,CI,0.46-0.61;拓普康:κ=0.63,CI,0.55-0.70),重复分级时观察者内一致性中等(尼康:分级者1和2的κ分别为0.63和0.64;拓普康:分级者1和2的κ分别为0.72和0.80)。
便携式非散瞳眼底相机可促进与标准散瞳眼底摄影相当的视盘图像远程评估。