Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Comment on the role of 3T diffusion tensor imaging in glaucoma
  1. Carlo Nucci1,
  2. Raffaele Mancino1,
  3. Alessio Martucci1,
  4. Francesca Bolacchi2,
  5. Guglielmo Manenti2,
  6. Claudio Cedrone1,
  7. Franco Culasso3,
  8. Roberto Floris2,
  9. Luciano Cerulli1,
  10. Francesco Giuseppe Garaci2,4
  1. 1Ophthalmology Unit, Department of Experimental Medicine and Surgery, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
  2. 2Department of Diagnostic Imaging, Molecular Imaging, Interventional Radiology and Radiotherapy, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy
  3. 3Health Statistics, Department of Experimental Medicine, University of Rome La Sapienza, Rome, Italy
  4. 4IRCCS San Raffaele, Rome, Italy
  1. Correspondence to Professor Carlo Nucci, Ophthalmology Unit, Department of Experimental Medicine and Surgery, University of Rome Tor Vergata, Via Montpellier 1, Rome 00133, Italy; nucci{at}

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.

We appreciate Dr Thakur's interest in our work,1 and we are grateful to him for giving us the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of our findings.

As stated in the Methods section, the visual-field criteria used for diagnosis of glaucoma consisted mainly of ‘deficits typical of glaucoma’, in particular ‘(1) corrected pattern SD less that 5% and/or glaucoma hemifield test results exceeding normal limits (2) absence of other disease that would explain the visual field abnormality (3) fixation loss rate of 25% or less and (4) false positive and false negative rates below 15%’.

Criterion 1 has been used in numerous studies where the presence of at least one of the findings listed was …

View Full Text


  • Contributors This letter has been conceptualised, designed and drafted by the equal contribution of all the authors.

  • Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None.

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