September 2016
Volume 57, Issue 12
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2016
Portable non-mydriatic imaging: a useful tool in a tele-glaucoma assessment
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Tyson N. Kim
    Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan Kellogg Eye Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
  • Suman S Thapa
    Ophthalmology, Tilganga Institute of Ophthalmology, Kathmandu, Nepal
  • Indira Paudyal
    Ophthalmology, Tilganga Institute of Ophthalmology, Kathmandu, Nepal
  • Leslie Niziol
    Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan Kellogg Eye Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
  • Shreya Shrestha
    Ophthalmology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
  • Ian F Pitha
    Ophthalmology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
  • Pradeep Y Ramulu
    Ophthalmology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
  • Alan L Robin
    Ophthalmology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, United States
    Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan Kellogg Eye Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
  • Maria A Woodward
    Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan Kellogg Eye Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
  • Paula Anne Newman-Casey
    Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, University of Michigan Kellogg Eye Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Tyson Kim, None; Suman Thapa, None; Indira Paudyal, None; Leslie Niziol, None; Shreya Shrestha, None; Ian Pitha, None; Pradeep Ramulu, None; Alan Robin, Aerie (C), Aerie (I), BioLight (C), Glaukos (I); Maria Woodward, Intelligent Retinal Imaging Systems (C); Paula Anne Newman-Casey, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  NIH Grant K23EY023596-01; NIH K12EY022299
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science September 2016, Vol.57, No Pagination Specified. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to Subscribers Only
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Tyson N. Kim, Suman S Thapa, Indira Paudyal, Leslie Niziol, Shreya Shrestha, Ian F Pitha, Pradeep Y Ramulu, Alan L Robin, Maria A Woodward, Paula Anne Newman-Casey; Portable non-mydriatic imaging: a useful tool in a tele-glaucoma assessment. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 201657(12):.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Portable fundus photography has the potential to improve glaucoma care in underserved populations through telemedicine. We compared images between two fundus cameras: a portable non-mydriatic Pictor [Volk, Mentor, OH] and a “gold-standard” table-top mydriatic Topcon [Topcon, Oakland, NJ] to determine the reliability and accuracy of portable fundus photography of the optic nerve in rural Nepal.

Methods : We performed a cross-sectional study of 422 eyes of 211 new patients recruited from the glaucoma clinic at the Tilganga Institute of Ophthalmology (Kathmandu, Nepal). A glaucoma specialist evaluated all subjects using a dilated fundus exam along with Sita Standard Humphrey Perimetry to establish the diagnosis of glaucoma (gold standard). Fundus photographs were taken using both a Pictor hand-held camera before dilation and a Topcon tabletop fundus camera after dilation for comparison. Two masked glaucoma specialists (PANC; IP) graded images for the cup-to-disc ratio (CDR), and for a diagnosis of glaucoma based on a CDR ≥0.7, or the presence of a notch or disc hemorrhage. Agreement between CDR measurements was assessed between cameras (for the same grader) and between graders (for the same camera). Remote readers’ diagnosis of glaucoma was compared to the true clinical diagnosis to estimate sensitivity and specificity.

Results : Of 422 eyes, 196 (46.5%) were diagnosed with glaucoma and 226 (53.5%) were diagnosed as normal. When comparing the Topcon and Pictor images, Reader 1 had CDR measurements within +/- 0.2 units 87% and 88% of the time for the first and second read, respectively, and Reader 2 had CDR measurements within +/- 0.2 units 91% and 91% of the time. Reader 1 had CDR measurements within +/- 0.1 units 67% and 68% of time for the first and second read, respectively, and Reader 2 had CDR measurements within +/- 0.2 units 72% and 76% of the time. The Pictor had a sensitivity of 48.5-61.5% and specificity of 44.1-62.8% to remotely diagnose glaucoma when compared with the clinical examination. Similarly, the Topcon had a sensitivity of 47.5-53.9% and specificity of 55.6-64.2% when compared with clinical examination.

Conclusions : We demonstrate high fidelity between cup-to-disc measurements using a hand-held portable, non-mydriatic camera and an established mydriatic fundus camera, though utilizing cup-to-disc measurements alone to diagnose glaucoma without ancillary testing had modest sensitivity and specificity.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2016 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, Wash., May 1-5, 2016.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×