Xiu Ling Tan, Sae Cheong Yap, Xiang Li, Leonard W Yip
{"title":"海德堡视网膜断层扫描-3中种族特异性数据库区分早期青光眼和正常人的比较。","authors":"Xiu Ling Tan, Sae Cheong Yap, Xiang Li, Leonard W Yip","doi":"10.2174/1874364101711010040","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the diagnostic accuracy of the 3 race-specific normative databases in Heidelberg Retina Tomography (HRT)-3, in differentiating between early glaucomatous and healthy normal Chinese eyes.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>52 healthy volunteers and 25 glaucoma patients were recruited for this prospective cross-sectional study. All underwent standardized interviews, ophthalmic examination, perimetry and HRT optic disc imaging. Area under the curve (AUC) receiver operating characteristics, sensitivity and specificity were derived to assess the discriminating abilities of the 3 normative databases, for both Moorfields Regression Analysis (MRA) and Glaucoma Probability Score (GPS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A significantly higher percentage (65%) of patients were classified as \"within normal limits\" using the MRA-Indian database, as compared to the MRA-Caucasian and MRA-African-American databases. However, for GPS, this was observed using the African-American database. For MRA, the highest sensitivity was obtained with both Caucasian and African-American databases (68%), while the highest specificity was from the Indian database (94%). The AUC for discrimination between glaucomatous and normal eyes by MRA-Caucasian, MRA-African-American and MRA-Indian databases were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.67-0.88), 0.79 (0.69-0.89) and 0.73 (0.63-0.84) respectively. For GPS, the highest sensitivity was obtained using either Caucasian or Indian databases (68%). The highest specificity was seen with the African-American database (98%). The AUC for GPS-Caucasian, GPS-African-American and GPS-Indian databases were 0.76 (95% CI, 0.66-0.87), 0.77 (0.67-0.87) and 0.76 (0.66-0.87) respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Comparison of the 3 ethnic databases did not reveal significant differences to differentiate early glaucomatous from normal Chinese eyes.</p>","PeriodicalId":46347,"journal":{"name":"Open Ophthalmology Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2017-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5362979/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Ethnic-specific Databases in Heidelberg Retina Tomography-3 to Discriminate Between Early Glaucoma and Normal Chinese Eyes.\",\"authors\":\"Xiu Ling Tan, Sae Cheong Yap, Xiang Li, Leonard W Yip\",\"doi\":\"10.2174/1874364101711010040\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the diagnostic accuracy of the 3 race-specific normative databases in Heidelberg Retina Tomography (HRT)-3, in differentiating between early glaucomatous and healthy normal Chinese eyes.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>52 healthy volunteers and 25 glaucoma patients were recruited for this prospective cross-sectional study. All underwent standardized interviews, ophthalmic examination, perimetry and HRT optic disc imaging. Area under the curve (AUC) receiver operating characteristics, sensitivity and specificity were derived to assess the discriminating abilities of the 3 normative databases, for both Moorfields Regression Analysis (MRA) and Glaucoma Probability Score (GPS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A significantly higher percentage (65%) of patients were classified as \\\"within normal limits\\\" using the MRA-Indian database, as compared to the MRA-Caucasian and MRA-African-American databases. However, for GPS, this was observed using the African-American database. For MRA, the highest sensitivity was obtained with both Caucasian and African-American databases (68%), while the highest specificity was from the Indian database (94%). The AUC for discrimination between glaucomatous and normal eyes by MRA-Caucasian, MRA-African-American and MRA-Indian databases were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.67-0.88), 0.79 (0.69-0.89) and 0.73 (0.63-0.84) respectively. For GPS, the highest sensitivity was obtained using either Caucasian or Indian databases (68%). The highest specificity was seen with the African-American database (98%). The AUC for GPS-Caucasian, GPS-African-American and GPS-Indian databases were 0.76 (95% CI, 0.66-0.87), 0.77 (0.67-0.87) and 0.76 (0.66-0.87) respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Comparison of the 3 ethnic databases did not reveal significant differences to differentiate early glaucomatous from normal Chinese eyes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46347,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Ophthalmology Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5362979/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Ophthalmology Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2174/1874364101711010040\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2017/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Ophthalmology Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2174/1874364101711010040","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of Ethnic-specific Databases in Heidelberg Retina Tomography-3 to Discriminate Between Early Glaucoma and Normal Chinese Eyes.
Purpose: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of the 3 race-specific normative databases in Heidelberg Retina Tomography (HRT)-3, in differentiating between early glaucomatous and healthy normal Chinese eyes.
Method: 52 healthy volunteers and 25 glaucoma patients were recruited for this prospective cross-sectional study. All underwent standardized interviews, ophthalmic examination, perimetry and HRT optic disc imaging. Area under the curve (AUC) receiver operating characteristics, sensitivity and specificity were derived to assess the discriminating abilities of the 3 normative databases, for both Moorfields Regression Analysis (MRA) and Glaucoma Probability Score (GPS).
Results: A significantly higher percentage (65%) of patients were classified as "within normal limits" using the MRA-Indian database, as compared to the MRA-Caucasian and MRA-African-American databases. However, for GPS, this was observed using the African-American database. For MRA, the highest sensitivity was obtained with both Caucasian and African-American databases (68%), while the highest specificity was from the Indian database (94%). The AUC for discrimination between glaucomatous and normal eyes by MRA-Caucasian, MRA-African-American and MRA-Indian databases were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.67-0.88), 0.79 (0.69-0.89) and 0.73 (0.63-0.84) respectively. For GPS, the highest sensitivity was obtained using either Caucasian or Indian databases (68%). The highest specificity was seen with the African-American database (98%). The AUC for GPS-Caucasian, GPS-African-American and GPS-Indian databases were 0.76 (95% CI, 0.66-0.87), 0.77 (0.67-0.87) and 0.76 (0.66-0.87) respectively.
Conclusion: Comparison of the 3 ethnic databases did not reveal significant differences to differentiate early glaucomatous from normal Chinese eyes.
期刊介绍:
The Open Ophthalmology Journal is an Open Access online journal, which publishes research articles, reviews/mini-reviews, letters and guest edited single topic issues in all important areas of experimental and clinical research in ophthalmology, including use of ophthalmological therapies, devices and surgical techniques. The Open Ophthalmology Journal, a peer-reviewed journal, is an important and reliable source of current information on developments in the field. The emphasis will be on publishing quality papers rapidly and making them freely available to researchers worldwide.