Comparison of Optic Disc Parameters By Slit-Lamp Biomicroscopy and Optical Coherence Tomography
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51253/pafmj.v76iSUPPL-9.12607Keywords:
Cross Sectional Analysis, Optic Disc, Optical Coherence Tomography.Abstract
Objective: To compare optic disc parameters by slit-lamp biomicroscopy and optical coherence tomography.
Study Design: Analytical cross-sectional study.
Place and Duration of Study: Department of Ophthalmology, PAF Hospital, Islamabad, Pakistan, from Jan to May 2023.
Methodology: The study was conducted on 100 eyes of 50 patients who underwent detailed refraction and dilated fundoscopy. Optic disc parameters were analyzed by a single clinician on a slit-lamp biomicroscope, while OCT images were assessed by a separate observer. Non-normally distributed continuous variables were summarized as median (interquartile range, IQR). Data was analyzed using SPSS version 24. Comparisons between clinician and OCT measurements were performed using the Mann–Whitney U test. A p-value ≤0.05 was considered significant.
Results: Overall, there were 32 males (64%) and 18 females (36%). The median age of participants was 22 years (IQR 11). Median RNFL thickness was 96 µm (IQR 12), and median intraocular pressure was 12 mmHg (IQR 2). Median (IQR) vertical and horizontal cup-to-disc ratios were 0.40 (0.20–0.50) and 0.30 (0.20–0.40) for clinician assessment, compared with 0.53 (0.42–0.64) and 0.61 (0.45–0.70) on OCT (Mann–Whitney U = 2843.5 and 1033, p < 0.001). Optic disc area was 3.06 mm² (2.82–3.29) for clinicians and 2.52 mm² (2.17–2.92) on OCT (Mann–Whitney U = 2160.5, p < 0.001). Axial length was 23.50 ± 1.20 mm.
Conclusion: Clinicians tend to underestimate cup-to-disc ratios on slit-lamp examination, while optic disc area may be slightly overestimated.
Downloads
References
1. Maupin E, Baudin F, Arnould L, Seydou A, Binquet C, Bron AM, et al. Accuracy of the ISNT rule and its variants for differentiating glaucomatous from normal eyes in a population-based study. Br J Ophthalmol 2020; 104(10): 1412-1417.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bjophthalmol-2019-315554
2. Stagg BC, Medeiros FA. A comparison of OCT parameters in identifying glaucoma damage in eyes suspected of having glaucoma. Ophthalmol Glaucoma 2020; 3(2): 90-96.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ogla.2019.11.008
3. Ahn YJ, Park YY, Park SH, Shin SY. Long term change of the optic disc and OCT parameters during myopic shift in children with large cup to disc ratio. PLoS One 2020; 15(7): e0235621.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0235621
4. Zhu D, Sun Q, Yang H, Zou Y, Liu C, Xu Y. Macular and optic disc parameters in children with amblyopic and no amblyopic eyes under optical coherence tomography fundus images. Comput Math Methods Med 2022; 2022: 9409749. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9409749
5. Muñoz-Gallego A, Rodríguez-Salgado M, López-López C, Torres-Peña JL, Ortueta-Olartecoechea A, De La Cruz J, et al. Optic disc morphology and interocular symmetry in children. Saudi J Ophthalmol 2024; 38(1): 47-52.
https://doi.org/10.4103/sjopt.sjopt_229_22
6. Khan SA, Mason L. Measurement of optic disc diameter and CD ratio using OCT imaging and fundus stereo biomicroscopy to find an agreement between the two. Pak J Ophthalmol 2018; 34(4): 259-264.
https://doi.org/10.36351/pjo.v34i4.265
7. Arnalich-Montiel F, Muñoz-Negrete FJ, Rebolleda G, Sales-Sanz M, Cabarga C. Cup-to-disc ratio: agreement between slit-lamp indirect ophthalmoscopic estimation and stratus optical coherence tomography measurement. Eye 2007; 21(8): 1041-1049.
https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.eye.6702391
8. Daneshvar R, Yarmohammadi A, Alizadeh R, Henry S, Law SK, Caprioli J, et al. Prediction of glaucoma progression with structural parameters: comparison of optical coherence tomography and clinical disc parameters. Am J Ophthalmol 2019; 208: 19-29.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2019.06.020
9. Danesh-Meyer HV. Comparison of disc damage likelihood scale, cup-to-disc ratio, and Heidelberg retina tomograph in the diagnosis of glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 2006; 90(4): 437-441.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2005.077131
10. Lee M, Yoo H, Ahn J. Comparison of disc analysis algorithms provided by Cirrus OCT and stereo optic-disc photography in normal and open angle glaucoma patients. Curr Eye Res 2013; 38(5): 605-613. https://doi.org/10.3109/02713683.2013.769059
11. Ribeiro Júnior V, Ribeiro CF, Ávila MP, Magacho L. Comparison of linear measurements of optic cup-to-disk ratio obtained with RTVue OCT and digital retinography. Arq Bras Oftalmol 2017; 80(6): 380-384. https://doi.org/10.5935/0004-2749.20170094
12. Stoor K, Karvonen E, Leiviskä I, Liinamaa J, Saarela V. Comparison of imaging parameters between OCT, GDx and HRT in the Northern Finland birth cohort eye study. Acta Ophthalmol 2022; 100(5): e1103-e1111. https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.15046
13. Vats V, Gupta P, Hasan MG, Kundu A, Raturi S. Comparison of optic disc on machine (OCT) versus manual assessment on slit lamp. Br J Healthcare Med Res 2023; 10(2): 97-103.
https://doi.org/10.14738/bjhmr.102.14226
14. Singh K, Bhushan P, Mishra D, Kaur K, Gurnani B, Singh A, et al. Assessment of optic disk by disk damage likelihood scale staging using slit-lamp biomicroscopy and optical coherence tomography in diagnosing primary open-angle glaucoma. Indian J Ophthalmol 2022; 70(12): 4152-4157. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijo.IJO_1113_22
15. Perera SA, Foo LL, Cheung CYL, Allen JC, Chua D, Tham YC, et al. Cup-to-disc ratio from Heidelberg Retina Tomograph 3 and high-definition optical coherence tomography agrees poorly with clinical assessment. J Glaucoma 2016; 25(2): 198-202.
https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0000000000000155
16. Zangwill LM, Weinreb RN, Berry S, Smith AR, Dirkes KA, Coleman AL, et al. Racial differences in optic disc topography: baseline results from the Confocal Scanning Laser Ophthalmoscopy Ancillary Study to the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study. Arch Ophthalmol 2004; 122(1): 22-28.
https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.122.1.22
17. Watkins R, Panchal L, Uddin J, Gunvant AP. Vertical cup-to-disc ratio: agreement between direct ophthalmoscopic estimation, fundus biomicroscopic estimation, and scanning laser ophthalmoscopic measurement. Optom Vis Sci 2003; 80(6): 454-459. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006324-200306000-00012
18. Jeong Y, Kim YK, Jeoung JW, Park KH. Comparison of optical coherence tomography structural parameters for diagnosis of glaucoma in high myopia. JAMA Ophthalmol 2023; 141(7): 631-639.
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2023.1717
19. Karabulut S, Kaderli A, Karabulut M, Sül S, Karalezli A. Optic nerve head vascular variations in pseudoexfoliative and primary open-angle glaucoma. Arq Bras Oftalmol 2023; 86(5): e20210420.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Huma Zainab, Aurangzeb Shaikh, Quratulain Paracha
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
