Comparison of Time Domain OCT and Spectrum Domain OCT for Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Assessment

Bu Ki Kim; Dong Wook Lee; Min Ahn; Nam Chun Cho

doi:10.3341/jkos.2009.50.10.1539

Journal List > J Korean Ophthalmol Soc > v.50(10) > 1008395

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Kim, Lee, Ahn, and Cho: Comparison of Time Domain OCT and Spectrum Domain OCT for Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Assessment

Original Article

J Korean Ophthalmol Soc 2009;50(10):1539-1547.

Published online: 3 August 2009

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3341/jkos.2009.50.10.1539

Comparison of Time Domain OCT and Spectrum Domain OCT for Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Assessment

Bu Ki Kim, MD, Dong Wook Lee, MD, Min Ahn, MD, Nam Chun Cho, MD

Department of Ophthalmology, Chonbuk National University Hospital, Junju, Korea

Address reprint requests to Dong Wook Lee, MD Department of Ophthalmology, Chonbuk National University hospital #634-18 Kumam 2-dong, Deokjin-gu, Junju 561-712, Korea Tel: 82-63-250-1965, Fax: 82-63-250-1965, E-mail: ldw@chonbuk.ac.kr

Received 20 November 2008 Accepted 30 June 2009

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

To compare retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness obtained with Stratus optical coherence tomography (OCT) and Cirrus OCT.

Methods

Sixty-one normal eyes were evaluated with Stratus and Cirrus OCT on the same day, and the RNFL thicknesses measured by the two OCT machines were compared. The correlation between the two data sets was obtained using Pearson’s correlation coefficient. The correlation between RNFL thickness and the difference in data measured by the two OCT machines was then assessed.

Results

The average RNFL thickness was significantly higher with Stratus OCT by 6.54±4.48 μm (p=0.0008). A strong correlation was present between the two RNFL thickness data sets (r=0.883), and the difference between Stratus and Cirrus values tended to increase as RNFL thickness increased.

Conclusions

RNFL thickness measurements in normal eyes scanned with Cirrus OCT correlate well with Stratus OCT measurements. Average RNFL thickness was significantly higher with Stratus OCT, and as the RNFL thickness increased, the difference between Stratus and Cirrus values increased.

Keywords: Cirrus, Optical coherence tomography, Retinal nerve fiber layer thickness, Stratus

References

1. Mikelberg FS, Yidegiligne HM, Shulzer M. Optic nerve axon count and axon diameter in patients with ocular hypertension and normal visual fields. Ophthalmology. 1995; 102:342–8.

2. Budenz DL, Michael A, Chang RT, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of the Stratus OCT for perimetric glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2005; 112:3–9.

3. Huang D, Swanson EA, Lin CP, et al. Optical coherence tomography. Science. 1991; 254:1178–81.

4. Paunescu LA, Schuman JS, Price LL, et al. Reproducibility of nerve fiber thickness, macular thickness, and optic nerve head measurements using Stratus OCT. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004; 45:1716–24.

5. Koizumi H, Spaide RF, Fisher YL, et al. Three-dimensional evaluation of vitreomacular traction and epiretinal membrane using spectral-domain optical coherence tomography. Am J Ophthalmol. 2008; 145:509–17.

6. Leung CK, Cheung CY, Weinreb RN, et al. Comparison of macular thickness measurements between time domain and spectral domain optical coherence tomography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008; 49:4893–7.

7. Forte R, Cennamo GL, Finelli ML, de Crecchio G. Comparison of time domain Stratus OCT and spectral domain SLO/OCT for assessment of macular thickness and volume. Eye. 2008; 1–8.

8. Kass MA, Heuer DK, Higginbotham EJ, et al. The ocular hypertension treatment study: a randomized trial determines that topical ocular hypotensive medication delays or prevents the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002; 120:701–13.

9. Medeiros FA, Zangwill LM, Bowd C, Weinreb RN. Comparison of the GDx VCC scanning laser polarimeter, HRT II confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscope, and Stratus OCT optical coherence tomograph for the detection of glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2004; 122:827–37.

10. Zangwill LM, Bowd C, Berry CC, et al. Discriminating between normal and glaucomatous eyes using the Heidelberg retina tomograph, GDx nerve fiber analyzer, and optical coherence tomograph. Arch Ophthalmol. 2001; 119:985–93.

11. Colen TP, Tang NE, Mulder PG, Lemij HG. Sensitivity and specificity of new GDx parameters. J Glaucoma. 2004; 13:28–33.

12. El Beltagi TA, Bowd C, Boden C, et al. Retinal nerve fiber layer thickness measured with optical coherence tomography is related to visual function in glaucomatous eyes. Ophthalmology. 2003; 110:2185–91.

13. Ford BA, Artes PH, McCormick TA, et al. Comparison of data analysis tools for detection of glaucoma with the Heidelberg retina tomograph. Ophthalmology. 2003; 110:1145–50.

14. Bowd C, Weinreb RN, Williams JM, Zangwill LM. The retinal nerve fiber layer thickness in ocular hypertensive, normal, and glaucomatous eyes with optical coherence tomography. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000; 118:22–6.

15. Hoh ST, Greenfield DS, Mistlberger A, et al. Optical coherence tomography and scanning laser polarimetry in normal, ocular hypertensive, and glaucomatous eyes. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000; 129:129–35.

16. Medeiros FA, Zangwill LM, Bowd C, et al. Evaluation of retinal nerve fiber layer, optic nerve head, and macular thickness measurements for glaucoma detection using optical coherence tomography. Am J Ophthalmol. 2005; 139:44–55.

17. Sihota R, Sony P, Gupta V, et al. Diagnostic capability of optical coherence tomography in evaluating the degree of glaucomatous retinal nerve fiber damage. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006; 47:2006–10.

18. Hoffmann EM, Medeiros FA, Sample PA, et al. Relationship between patterns of visual field loss and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness measurements. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006; 141:463–71.

19. Jaffe GJ, Caprioli J. Optical coherence tomography to detect and manage retinal disease and glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 2004; 137:156–69.

20. Wojtkowski M, Kowalczyk A, Leitgeb R, Fercher AF. Full range complex spectral optical coherence tomography technique in eye imaging. Opt Lett. 2002; 27:1415–7.

21. Legarreta JE, Gregori G, Punjabi OS, et al. Macular thickness measurements in normal eyes using spectral domain optical coherence tomography. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2008; 39:S43–9.

22. Pons ME, Garcia-Valenzuela E. Redefining the limit of the outer retina in optical coherence tomography scans. Ophthalmology. 2005; 112:1079–85.

23. Srinivasan VJ, Monson BK, Wojtkowski M, et al. Characterization of outer retinal morphology with high-speed, ultrahigh-resolution optical coherence tomography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2008; 49:1571–9.

24. Chan A, Duker JS, Ishikawa H, et al. Quantification of photoreceptor layer thickness in normal eyes using optical coherence tomography. Retina. 2006; 26:655–60.

25. Jaffe GJ, Caprioli J. Optical coherence tomography to detect and manage retinal disease and glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 2004; 137:156–69.

26. Tzamalis A, Kynigopoulos M, Schlote T, Haefliger I. Improved reproducibility of retinal nerve fiber layer thickness measurements with the repeat-scan protocol using the Stratus OCT in normal and glaucomatous eyes. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol. 2009; 247:245–52.

27. Polito A, Del Borrello M, Isola M, et al. Repeatability and reproducibility of fast macular thickness mapping with Stratus optical coherence tomography. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005; 123:1330–7.

28. Song YM, Uhm KB. Discrimination between normal and early stage of glaucomatous eyes using the Stratus optical coherence tomography. J Korean Ophthalmol Soc. 2007; 48:1675–85.

29. Hood DC, Raza AS, Kay KY, et al. A comparison of retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness obtained with frequency and time domain optical coherence tomography (OCT). Opt Express. 2009; 17:3997–4003.

30. Hood DC, Fortune B, Arthur SN, et al. Blood vessel contributions to retinal nerve fiber layer thickness profiles measured with optical coherence tomography. J Glaucoma. 2008; 17:519–28.

31. Ghadiali Q, Hood DC, Lee C, et al. An analysis of normal variations in retinal nerve fiber layer thickness profiles measured with optical coherence tomography. J Glaucoma. 2008; 17:333–40.

Figure 1.

(A) Fundus photograph with white box indicating scanning area of Cirrus OCT, (B) Fundus photograph with the six radial line scanning pattern of Stratus OCT.

Figure 2.

Scatter plots of the Stratus RNFL thickness versus the Cirrus RNFL thickness. (A) Mean RNFL thickness, (B) Temporal RNFL thickness, (C) Superior RNFL thickness, (D) Nasal RNFL thickness, (E) Inferior RNFL thickness.

Figure 3.

Bland-Altman plots of Stratus minus Cirrus thickness differences versus the average RNFL. (A) Mean RNFL thickness, (B) Temporal RNFL thickness,(C) Superior RNFL thickness, (D) Nasal RNFL thickness,(E) Inferior RNFL thickness.

Figure 4.

(A) Stratus OCT and Cirrus OCT RNFL profiles.(B) Stratus OCT scan. (C) Cirrus OCT scan. Red dashed lines indicate two places where the two scans differ the most. And red arrows indicate shadow of retinal blood vessels.

Table 1.

Basic characteristics of participants

	Patients
Number of patients (eyes)	33 (61)
Mean age (years)	48.31±12.48
Age range (years)	27∼68
Gender M/F	19 (35) / 14 (26)
Mean visual acuity (LogMAR)	0.066±0.052
Mean IOP (mmHg)	14.2 (4.84)
C/D ratio	0.33

Table 2.

Comparison of RNFL thickness scanned with Stratus and Cirrus OCT (n=61)

	RNFL thickness		Difference	p-value	r
	Stratus OCT	Cirrus OCT	Difference	p-value	r
Average	104.79±8.95	98.25±6.35	6.54±4.48	0.0008	0.883
Temporal	80.36±12.81	73.66±8.01	6.70±8.45	0.0012	0.905
Superior	130.74±14.75	120.62±11.92	10.12±6.64	0.0002	0.754
Nasal	76.10±11.60	72.36±8.29	3.74±7.73	0.0053	0.951
Inferior	131.94±13.46	126.34±11.63	5.60±4.34	0.0029	0.763

Table 3.

Comparison of Stratus and Cirrus OCT characteristics

	Stratus OCT	Cirrus OCT
A-scans	Fast RNFL scan:	Optic Disc Cube 200×200:
	6 mm×6 lines	6 mm×6 mm
	(256 A-scans×6 B-scans)	(200 A-scans×200 B-scans)
A-scan speed	400/sec	27,000/sec
Light source wavelength	820 nm	840 nm
Axial resolution	8∼10 μm	5 μm
Transverse resolution	20 μm	20 μm
Side-by-side A-scan acquisition and segmentation	42 μm (circle)	30 μm (cube)
TSNIT display pixel size	42 μm	42 μm

TOOLS

Similar articles