Article Text

other Versions

PDF
Characterisation of Schlemm's canal cross-sectional area
  1. Larry Kagemann1,2,
  2. Jessica E Nevins1,
  3. Ninj-Jiun Jan1,2,
  4. Gadi Wollstein1,
  5. Hiroshi Ishikawa1,2,
  6. Janice Kagemann3,
  7. Ian A Sigal1,2,
  8. Zach Nadler1,
  9. Yun Ling1,
  10. Joel S Schuman1,2
  1. 1Department of Ophthalmology, UPMC Eye Center, Eye and Ear Institute, Ophthalmology and Visual Science Research Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
  2. 2Department of Bioengineering, Swanson School of Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
  3. 3Zeiss Inc., Dublin, California, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Larry Kagemann, Department of Ophthalmology, UPMC Eye Center, Eye and Ear Institute, Ophthalmology and Visual Science Research Center, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, 203 Lothrop St., Suite 834, Pittsburgh, PA 15221, USA; lek19{at}pitt.edu

Abstract

Purpose To compare three methods of Schlemm's canal (SC) cross-sectional area (CSA) measurement.

Methods Ten eyes (10 healthy volunteers) were imaged three times using spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (Cirrus HD-OCT, Zeiss, Dublin, California, USA). Aqueous outflow vascular structures and SC collector channel ostia were used as landmarks to identify a reference location within the limbus. SC CSA was assessed within a 1 mm segment (±15 frames of the reference, 31 frames in all) by three techniques. (1) Using a random number table, SC CSA in five random frames from the set of 31 surrounding the reference were measured and averaged. (2) The most easily visualised SC location (subjective) was measured, and (3) SC CSA was measured in all 31 consecutive B-scans, and averaged. (comprehensive average, gold standard). Subjective and random CSAs were compared with the comprehensive by general estimating equation modelling, and structural equation modelling quantified agreement.

Results The average from five random locations (4175±1045 µm2) was not significantly different than that obtained from the gold standard comprehensive assessment (4064±1308 µm2, p=0.6537). Subjectively located SC CSA (7614±2162 µm2) was significantly larger than the comprehensive gold standard SC CSA (p<0.0001). The average of five random frames produced significantly less bias than did subjective location, yielding a calibration line crossing the ‘no-bias’ line.

Discussion Subjectively located SC CSA measurements produce high estimates of SC CSA. SC assessed by measuring five random locations estimate CSA was similar to the gold standard estimate.

  • Aqueous humour
  • Imaging

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.