RESEARCH ARTICLE
Differentiating Glaucomatous from Non-Glaucomatous Optic Nerve Cupping by Optical Coherence Tomography
Preeya K Gupta 1, Sanjay Asrani 1, Sharon F Freedman 1, Mays El-Dairi #, 1, M Tariq Bhatti*, #, 1, 2
Article Information
Identifiers and Pagination:
Year: 2011Volume: 5
First Page: 1
Last Page: 7
Publisher ID: TONEUJ-5-1
DOI: 10.2174/1874205X01105010001
Article History:
Received Date: 12/6/2010Revision Received Date: 20/8/2010
Acceptance Date: 1/9/2010
Electronic publication date: 26/1/2011
Collection year: 2011
open-access license: This is an open access article licensed 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 work is properly cited.
Abstract
Background:
In clinical practice, the differentiation of glaucomatous from non-glaucomatous cupping can be difficult, even for experienced observers. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of optical coherence tomography (OCT) in differentiating glaucomatous from non-glaucomatous optic nerve cupping in a cross-sectional pilot study.
Methods:
Eleven consecutive patients presenting to the Duke Eye Center from September 2007 to July 2008 with non-glaucomatous optic nerve cupping and 12 patients with glaucomatous optic nerve cupping were identified. All patients underwent Stratus® OCT imaging: fast macular map, fast retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) 3.4 thickness, and fast optic disc protocols. Automated visual field perimetry was performed on the date of OCT scan in non-glaucomatous cupping patients, and from 0-9 months of scan date in glaucoma patients. Eyes were matched by optic nerve cup-to-disc area ratio; average and mean deviation were calculated for each variable.
Results:
For a similar average RNFL, patients with non-glaucomatous optic nerve cupping had lower nasal and temporal RNFL thickness, as well as lower macular thickness and volume compared to patients with glaucomatous optic nerve cupping.
Conclusion:
OCT appears to be a useful technology in differentiating glaucomatous from non-glaucomatous optic nerve cupping. The pattern of RNFL loss appears more diffuse in non-glaucomatous optic nerve cupping compared to glaucomatous optic nerve cupping. Future studies with larger sample size and specific neuro-ophthalmic causes of optic nerve cupping may further elucidate the role of OCT in this clinical setting.
