Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Wide-field optical coherence tomography deviation map for early glaucoma detection
  1. Hyungjun Kim1,2,
  2. Hae Min Park1,3,
  3. Hyo Chan Jeong1,3,
  4. So Yeon Moon4,
  5. Hyunsoo Cho1,
  6. Han Woong Lim1,3,
  7. Mincheol Seong1,5,
  8. Junhong Park2,
  9. Won June Lee1,3
  1. 1 Department of Ophthalmology, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
  2. 2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Hanyang University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
  3. 3 Department of Ophthalmology, Hanyang University Seoul Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
  4. 4 Hanyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
  5. 5 Department of Ophthalmology, Hanyang University Guri Hospital, Guri, Republic of Korea
  1. Correspondence to Won June Lee, Department of Ophthalmology, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea; wonjunelee{at}


Background/aims This study aimed to establish a wide-field optical coherence tomography (OCT) deviation map obtained from swept-source OCT (SS-OCT) scans. Moreover, it also aimed to compare the diagnostic ability of this wide-field deviation map with that of the peripapillary and macular deviation maps currently being used for the detection of early glaucoma (EG).

Methods Four hundred eyes, including 200 healthy eyes and 200 eyes with EG were enrolled in this retrospective observational study. Patients underwent a comprehensive ocular examination, including wide-field SS-OCT (DRI-OCT Triton; Topcon, Tokyo, Japan). The individual wide-field scan was converted into a uniform template using the fovea and optic disc centres as fixed landmarks. Subsequently, the wide-field deviation map was obtained via the comparison between individual wide-field data and a normative wide-field database that had been created by combining images of healthy eyes into a uniform template in a previous study. The ability of the new wide-field deviation map to distinguish between EG and healthy eyes was assessed by comparing it with conventional deviation maps based on the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

Results The wide-field deviation map obtained using the normative wide-field database showed the highest diagnostic ability for the diagnosis of EG (AUC=0.980 and 961 for colour-coded pixels presenting <5% and <1%, respectively) among various deviation maps. Its AUC was significantly superior to that of most conventional deviation maps (p<0.05). The wide-field deviation map demonstrated early structural glaucomatous damage well over a wider area.

Conclusion The wide-field SS-OCT deviation map exhibited good performance for distinguishing between eyes with EG and healthy eyes. The visualisation of the wider damaged area on the wide-field deviation map could be useful for the diagnosis of EG in clinical settings.

  • glaucoma
  • diagnostic tests/investigation
  • imaging

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request.

Statistics from

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.

Data availability statement

Data are available upon reasonable request.

View Full Text


  • Contributors HK and WJL: conception and design of the work. All authors: acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data for the work, drafting the work. HK, SYM and WJL revising the work.

  • Funding This research was supported by the Bio & Medical Technology Development Programme of the National Research Foundation (NRF) funded by the Korean government (MSIT) (No. NRF-2019M3E5D1A01069352).

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.

Linked Articles

  • Highlights from this issue
    Frank Larkin