Glaucoma versus red disease

Imaging and glaucoma diagnosis

Gabriel T. Chong, Richard K Lee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

39 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The use of ophthalmic imaging for documentation and diagnosis of ocular disease is rising dramatically. Optical coherence tomography (OCT), confocal scanning laser tomography (CSLT), scanning laser polarimetry (SLP) and photographic imaging of the optic nerve head (ONH) are currently used to document baseline characteristics of the ONH and for diagnosing glaucoma and glaucoma progression secondary to loss of retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL). Imaging modalities typically provide information on ONH and RNFL characteristics which are outside of the normal (relative to normative databases) in red lettering or boxes, whereas ONH and RNFL characteristics within the normal range are presented in green. RECENT FINDINGS: As imaging modalities have become more sophisticated and are validated in research studies, clinicians have come to rely upon data from these imaging devices to aid in differentiating between normal and glaucomatous states of the ONH and RNFL - typically by examining if the data are green or red suggesting normal or abnormal. However, normative databases can sometimes be flawed relative to atypical ONH or RNFL morphologies and imaging can provide artifacts which do not represent true ocular disease but secondary to limitations of imaging technology. SUMMARY: Ophthalmic imaging is an important adjunct to clinical diagnosis but the results from imaging devices need to be assessed critically relative to artifacts of imaging and the limitations of the technology and its normative databases.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)79-88
Number of pages10
JournalCurrent Opinion in Ophthalmology
Volume23
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2012

Fingerprint

Optic Disk
Glaucoma
Nerve Fibers
Eye Diseases
Databases
Artifacts
Scanning Laser Polarimetry
Technology
Equipment and Supplies
Optical Coherence Tomography
Documentation
Reference Values
Lasers
Tomography
Research

Keywords

  • Confocal scanning laser tomography
  • Glaucoma
  • Imaging
  • Optical coherence tomography
  • Peri-papillary
  • Scanning laser polarimetry

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

Glaucoma versus red disease : Imaging and glaucoma diagnosis. / Chong, Gabriel T.; Lee, Richard K.

In: Current Opinion in Ophthalmology, Vol. 23, No. 2, 01.03.2012, p. 79-88.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{cdfa43f0167d4510a200ce0c691e1699,
title = "Glaucoma versus red disease: Imaging and glaucoma diagnosis",
abstract = "PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The use of ophthalmic imaging for documentation and diagnosis of ocular disease is rising dramatically. Optical coherence tomography (OCT), confocal scanning laser tomography (CSLT), scanning laser polarimetry (SLP) and photographic imaging of the optic nerve head (ONH) are currently used to document baseline characteristics of the ONH and for diagnosing glaucoma and glaucoma progression secondary to loss of retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL). Imaging modalities typically provide information on ONH and RNFL characteristics which are outside of the normal (relative to normative databases) in red lettering or boxes, whereas ONH and RNFL characteristics within the normal range are presented in green. RECENT FINDINGS: As imaging modalities have become more sophisticated and are validated in research studies, clinicians have come to rely upon data from these imaging devices to aid in differentiating between normal and glaucomatous states of the ONH and RNFL - typically by examining if the data are green or red suggesting normal or abnormal. However, normative databases can sometimes be flawed relative to atypical ONH or RNFL morphologies and imaging can provide artifacts which do not represent true ocular disease but secondary to limitations of imaging technology. SUMMARY: Ophthalmic imaging is an important adjunct to clinical diagnosis but the results from imaging devices need to be assessed critically relative to artifacts of imaging and the limitations of the technology and its normative databases.",
keywords = "Confocal scanning laser tomography, Glaucoma, Imaging, Optical coherence tomography, Peri-papillary, Scanning laser polarimetry",
author = "Chong, {Gabriel T.} and Lee, {Richard K}",
year = "2012",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/ICU.0b013e32834ff431",
language = "English",
volume = "23",
pages = "79--88",
journal = "Current Opinion in Ophthalmology",
issn = "1040-8738",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Glaucoma versus red disease

T2 - Imaging and glaucoma diagnosis

AU - Chong, Gabriel T.

AU - Lee, Richard K

PY - 2012/3/1

Y1 - 2012/3/1

N2 - PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The use of ophthalmic imaging for documentation and diagnosis of ocular disease is rising dramatically. Optical coherence tomography (OCT), confocal scanning laser tomography (CSLT), scanning laser polarimetry (SLP) and photographic imaging of the optic nerve head (ONH) are currently used to document baseline characteristics of the ONH and for diagnosing glaucoma and glaucoma progression secondary to loss of retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL). Imaging modalities typically provide information on ONH and RNFL characteristics which are outside of the normal (relative to normative databases) in red lettering or boxes, whereas ONH and RNFL characteristics within the normal range are presented in green. RECENT FINDINGS: As imaging modalities have become more sophisticated and are validated in research studies, clinicians have come to rely upon data from these imaging devices to aid in differentiating between normal and glaucomatous states of the ONH and RNFL - typically by examining if the data are green or red suggesting normal or abnormal. However, normative databases can sometimes be flawed relative to atypical ONH or RNFL morphologies and imaging can provide artifacts which do not represent true ocular disease but secondary to limitations of imaging technology. SUMMARY: Ophthalmic imaging is an important adjunct to clinical diagnosis but the results from imaging devices need to be assessed critically relative to artifacts of imaging and the limitations of the technology and its normative databases.

AB - PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The use of ophthalmic imaging for documentation and diagnosis of ocular disease is rising dramatically. Optical coherence tomography (OCT), confocal scanning laser tomography (CSLT), scanning laser polarimetry (SLP) and photographic imaging of the optic nerve head (ONH) are currently used to document baseline characteristics of the ONH and for diagnosing glaucoma and glaucoma progression secondary to loss of retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL). Imaging modalities typically provide information on ONH and RNFL characteristics which are outside of the normal (relative to normative databases) in red lettering or boxes, whereas ONH and RNFL characteristics within the normal range are presented in green. RECENT FINDINGS: As imaging modalities have become more sophisticated and are validated in research studies, clinicians have come to rely upon data from these imaging devices to aid in differentiating between normal and glaucomatous states of the ONH and RNFL - typically by examining if the data are green or red suggesting normal or abnormal. However, normative databases can sometimes be flawed relative to atypical ONH or RNFL morphologies and imaging can provide artifacts which do not represent true ocular disease but secondary to limitations of imaging technology. SUMMARY: Ophthalmic imaging is an important adjunct to clinical diagnosis but the results from imaging devices need to be assessed critically relative to artifacts of imaging and the limitations of the technology and its normative databases.

KW - Confocal scanning laser tomography

KW - Glaucoma

KW - Imaging

KW - Optical coherence tomography

KW - Peri-papillary

KW - Scanning laser polarimetry

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84857235860&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84857235860&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/ICU.0b013e32834ff431

DO - 10.1097/ICU.0b013e32834ff431

M3 - Article

VL - 23

SP - 79

EP - 88

JO - Current Opinion in Ophthalmology

JF - Current Opinion in Ophthalmology

SN - 1040-8738

IS - 2

ER -