Advances in OCT technology have also allowed for higher-resolution imaging of the ONH
140 and quantification of ONH parameters, but the clinical value of OCT ONH parameters remains controversial. Compared with previous OCT technology, SD-OCT relies less on data interpolation, and this has resulted in far better delineation of ONH structures than could be achieved with TD-OCT. Studies have found that ONH parameters have an excellent ability to discriminate between normal eyes and eyes with even mild glaucoma. Parameters such as rim area, vertical rim thickness, and vertical cup to disc ratio were found to have the greatest diagnostic ability and were as good as RNFL thickness parameters in diagnosing glaucoma.
40 In some cases, ONH parameters were found to be better at initial glaucoma detection and discriminating glaucoma and glaucoma suspect subjects from normal subjects.
141,142 However, a number of studies show ONH parameters are inferior to standard circumpapillary measurements for glaucoma detection.
122,143,144 One study, although limited by using VFs as a reference standard, found that RNFL and macular parameters were significantly better for glaucoma diagnosis than ONH parameters, especially for early-stage glaucoma.
21,143 Differences in these results are at least partially a consequence of the reference standard used to select cases and controls given that a reference standard must be employed to select cases and controls for any diagnostic accuracy study.
145 There is a greater chance, for example, that patients with clearly abnormal optic disc features will be classified as cases if the reference criteria include optic disc appearance. Retinal nerve fiber layer abnormalities are not as easily detectable by clinicians.
146,147 Similarly, those with normal appearing optic discs will be declared controls. This type of reference standard introduces a bias towards favoring accuracy of topographic ONH parameters.
145 Furthermore, differences in commercially available OCT devices could at least partially explain the differences between studies, such as differences in the acquisition speed, scanning rate, spatial resolution,
142 layer detection algorithms, and analytical software. Each of the different devices, therefore, may report different RNFL thickness values and ONH measurements. Additional reasons could also contribute to variable results, including differences in the number of subjects, differences in ethnicity, or differences in the representation of the different stages of glaucoma.
40,143 Consideration of a combination of circumpapillary and ONH parameters is likely the best approach for glaucoma detection.
29,78,141