NobleBlocks
Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust logo

Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

Hospital / health systemLondon, United Kingdom

Research output, citation impact, and the most-cited recent papers from Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (United Kingdom). Aggregated across the NobleBlocks index of 300M+ scholarly works.

Total works
8.8K
Citations
766.0K
h-index
313
i10-index
10.6K
Also known as
Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

Top-cited papers from Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

Global causes of blindness and distance vision impairment 1990–2020: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Seth Flaxman, Rupert Bourne, Serge Resnikoff, Peter Ackland +4 more
2017· The Lancet Global Health3.4Kdoi:10.1016/s2214-109x(17)30393-5

BACKGROUND: Contemporary data for causes of vision impairment and blindness form an important basis of recommendations in public health policies. Refreshment of the Global Vision Database with recently published data sources permitted modelling of cause of vision loss data from 1990 to 2015, further disaggregation by cause, and forecasts to 2020. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we analysed published and unpublished population-based data for the causes of vision impairment and blindness from 1980 to 2014. We identified population-based studies published before July 8, 2014, by searching online databases with no language restrictions (MEDLINE from Jan 1, 1946, and Embase from Jan 1, 1974, and the WHO Library Database). We fitted a series of regression models to estimate the proportion of moderate or severe vision impairment (defined as presenting visual acuity of <6/18 but ≥3/60 in the better eye) and blindness (presenting visual acuity of <3/60 in the better eye) by cause, age, region, and year. FINDINGS: We identified 288 studies of 3 983 541 participants contributing data from 98 countries. Among the global population with moderate or severe vision impairment in 2015 (216·6 million [80% uncertainty interval 98·5 million to 359·1 million]), the leading causes were uncorrected refractive error (116·3 million [49·4 million to 202·1 million]), cataract (52·6 million [18·2 million to 109·6 million]), age-related macular degeneration (8·4 million [0·9 million to 29·5 million]), glaucoma (4·0 million [0·6 million to 13·3 million]), and diabetic retinopathy (2·6 million [0·2 million to 9·9 million]). Among the global population who were blind in 2015 (36·0 million [12·9 million to 65·4 million]), the leading causes were cataract (12·6 million [3·4 million to 28·7 million]), uncorrected refractive error (7·4 million [2·4 million to 14·8 million]), and glaucoma (2·9 million [0·4 million to 9·9 million]). By 2020, among the global population with moderate or severe vision impairment (237·1 million [101·5 million to 399·0 million]), the number of people affected by uncorrected refractive error is anticipated to rise to 127·7 million (51·0 million to 225·3 million), by cataract to 57·1 million (17·9 million to 124·1 million), by age-related macular degeneration to 8·8 million (0·8 million to 32·1 million), by glaucoma to 4·5 million (0·5 million to 15·4 million), and by diabetic retinopathy to 3·2 million (0·2 million to 12·9 million). By 2020, among the global population who are blind (38·5 million [13·2 million to 70·9 million]), the number of patients blind because of cataract is anticipated to rise to 13·4 million (3·3 million to 31·6 million), because of uncorrected refractive error to 8·0 million (2·5 million to 16·3 million), and because of glaucoma to 3·2 million (0·4 million to 11·0 million). Cataract and uncorrected refractive error combined contributed to 55% of blindness and 77% of vision impairment in adults aged 50 years and older in 2015. World regions varied markedly in the causes of blindness and vision impairment in this age group, with a low prevalence of cataract (<22% for blindness and 14·1-15·9% for vision impairment) and a high prevalence of age-related macular degeneration (>14% of blindness) as causes in the high-income subregions. Blindness and vision impairment at all ages in 2015 due to diabetic retinopathy (odds ratio 2·52 [1·48-3·73]) and cataract (1·21 [1·17-1·25]) were more common among women than among men, whereas blindness and vision impairment due to glaucoma (0·71 [0·57-0·86]) and corneal opacity (0·54 [0·43-0·66]) were more common among men than among women, with no sex difference related to age-related macular degeneration (0·91 [0·70-1·14]). INTERPRETATION: The number of people affected by the common causes of vision loss has increased substantially as the population increases and ages. Preventable vision loss due to cataract (reversible with surgery) and refractive error (reversible with spectacle correction) continue to cause most cases of blindness and moderate or severe vision impairment in adults aged 50 years and older. A large scale-up of eye care provision to cope with the increasing numbers is needed to address avoidable vision loss. FUNDING: Brien Holden Vision Institute.

The definition and classification of glaucoma in prevalence surveys
Paul J. Foster
2002· British Journal of Ophthalmology2.3Kdoi:10.1136/bjo.86.2.238

This review describes a scheme for diagnosis of glaucoma in population based prevalence surveys. Cases are diagnosed on the grounds of both structural and functional evidence of glaucomatous optic neuropathy. The scheme also makes provision for diagnosing glaucoma in eyes with severe visual loss where formal field testing is impractical, and for blind eyes in which the optic disc cannot be seen because of media opacities.

A comparison of deep learning performance against health-care professionals in detecting diseases from medical imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Xiaoxuan Liu, Livia Faes, Aditya U. Kale, Siegfried K. Wagner +4 more
2019· The Lancet Digital Health1.8Kdoi:10.1016/s2589-7500(19)30123-2

BACKGROUND: Deep learning offers considerable promise for medical diagnostics. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of deep learning algorithms versus health-care professionals in classifying diseases using medical imaging. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched Ovid-MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index for studies published from Jan 1, 2012, to June 6, 2019. Studies comparing the diagnostic performance of deep learning models and health-care professionals based on medical imaging, for any disease, were included. We excluded studies that used medical waveform data graphics material or investigated the accuracy of image segmentation rather than disease classification. We extracted binary diagnostic accuracy data and constructed contingency tables to derive the outcomes of interest: sensitivity and specificity. Studies undertaking an out-of-sample external validation were included in a meta-analysis, using a unified hierarchical model. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018091176. FINDINGS: Our search identified 31 587 studies, of which 82 (describing 147 patient cohorts) were included. 69 studies provided enough data to construct contingency tables, enabling calculation of test accuracy, with sensitivity ranging from 9·7% to 100·0% (mean 79·1%, SD 0·2) and specificity ranging from 38·9% to 100·0% (mean 88·3%, SD 0·1). An out-of-sample external validation was done in 25 studies, of which 14 made the comparison between deep learning models and health-care professionals in the same sample. Comparison of the performance between health-care professionals in these 14 studies, when restricting the analysis to the contingency table for each study reporting the highest accuracy, found a pooled sensitivity of 87·0% (95% CI 83·0-90·2) for deep learning models and 86·4% (79·9-91·0) for health-care professionals, and a pooled specificity of 92·5% (95% CI 85·1-96·4) for deep learning models and 90·5% (80·6-95·7) for health-care professionals. INTERPRETATION: Our review found the diagnostic performance of deep learning models to be equivalent to that of health-care professionals. However, a major finding of the review is that few studies presented externally validated results or compared the performance of deep learning models and health-care professionals using the same sample. Additionally, poor reporting is prevalent in deep learning studies, which limits reliable interpretation of the reported diagnostic accuracy. New reporting standards that address specific challenges of deep learning could improve future studies, enabling greater confidence in the results of future evaluations of this promising technology. FUNDING: None.

The Lancet Global Health Commission on Global Eye Health: vision beyond 2020
Matthew J. Burton, Jacqueline Ramke, Ana Patrícia Marques, Rupert Bourne +4 more
2021· The Lancet Global Health1.5Kdoi:10.1016/s2214-109x(20)30488-5

There is extensive evidence showing that improving eye health contributes directly and indirectly to achieving many Sustainable Development Goals, including reducing poverty and improving work productivity, general and mental health, and education and equity. Improving eye health is a practical and cost-effective way of unlocking human potential. Eye health needs to be reframed as an enabling, cross-cutting issue within the sustainable development framework.

Artificial Intelligence and Deep Learning in Ophthalmology
Daniel Shu Wei Ting, Pearse A. Keane, Lily Peng, John Peter Campbell +4 more
2018· Artificial Intelligence in Medicine1.2Kdoi:10.1007/978-3-030-64573-1_200

Artificial intelligence (AI) based on deep learning (DL) has sparked tremendous global interest in recent years. DL has been widely adopted in image recognition, speech recognition and natural language processing, but is only beginning to impact on healthcare. In ophthalmology, DL has been applied to fundus photographs, optical coherence tomography and visual fields, achieving robust classification performance in the detection of diabetic retinopathy and retinopathy of prematurity, the glaucoma-like disc, macular oedema and age-related macular degeneration. DL in ocular imaging may be used in conjunction with telemedicine as a possible solution to screen, diagnose and monitor major eye diseases for patients in primary care and community settings. Nonetheless, there are also potential challenges with DL application in ophthalmology, including clinical and technical challenges, explainability of the algorithm results, medicolegal issues, and physician and patient acceptance of the AI ‘black-box’ algorithms. DL could potentially revolutionise how ophthalmology is practised in the future. This review provides a summary of the state-of-the-art DL systems described for ophthalmic applications, potential challenges in clinical deployment and the path forward.

Adult-Onset Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma Caused by Mutations in Optineurin
Tayebeh Rezaie, Anne H. Child, Roger A. Hitchings, Glen Brice +4 more
2002· Science1.1Kdoi:10.1126/science.1066901

Primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) affects 33 million individuals worldwide and is a leading cause of blindness. In a study of 54 families with autosomal dominantly inherited adult-onset POAG, we identified the causative gene on chromosome 10p14 and designated it OPTN (for "optineurin"). Sequence alterations in OPTN were found in 16.7% of families with hereditary POAG, including individuals with normal intraocular pressure. The OPTN gene codes for a conserved 66-kilodalton protein of unknown function that has been implicated in the tumor necrosis factor-alpha signaling pathway and that interacts with diverse proteins including Huntingtin, Ras-associated protein RAB8, and transcription factor IIIA. Optineurin is expressed in trabecular meshwork, nonpigmented ciliary epithelium, retina, and brain, and we speculate that it plays a neuroprotective role.

Reporting guidelines for clinical trial reports for interventions involving artificial intelligence: the CONSORT-AI extension
Xiaoxuan Liu, Samantha Cruz Rivera, David Moher, Melanie Calvert +4 more
2020· Nature Medicine999doi:10.1038/s41591-020-1034-x

The CONSORT 2010 statement provides minimum guidelines for reporting randomized trials. Its widespread use has been instrumental in ensuring transparency in the evaluation of new interventions. More recently, there has been a growing recognition that interventions involving artificial intelligence (AI) need to undergo rigorous, prospective evaluation to demonstrate impact on health outcomes. The CONSORT-AI (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-Artificial Intelligence) extension is a new reporting guideline for clinical trials evaluating interventions with an AI component. It was developed in parallel with its companion statement for clinical trial protocols: SPIRIT-AI (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials-Artificial Intelligence). Both guidelines were developed through a staged consensus process involving literature review and expert consultation to generate 29 candidate items, which were assessed by an international multi-stakeholder group in a two-stage Delphi survey (103 stakeholders), agreed upon in a two-day consensus meeting (31 stakeholders) and refined through a checklist pilot (34 participants). The CONSORT-AI extension includes 14 new items that were considered sufficiently important for AI interventions that they should be routinely reported in addition to the core CONSORT 2010 items. CONSORT-AI recommends that investigators provide clear descriptions of the AI intervention, including instructions and skills required for use, the setting in which the AI intervention is integrated, the handling of inputs and outputs of the AI intervention, the human-AI interaction and provision of an analysis of error cases. CONSORT-AI will help promote transparency and completeness in reporting clinical trials for AI interventions. It will assist editors and peer reviewers, as well as the general readership, to understand, interpret and critically appraise the quality of clinical trial design and risk of bias in the reported outcomes.

A foundation model for generalizable disease detection from retinal images
Yukun Zhou, Mark A. Chia, Siegfried K. Wagner, Murat Seçkin Ayhan +4 more
2023· Nature802doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06555-x

Abstract Medical artificial intelligence (AI) offers great potential for recognizing signs of health conditions in retinal images and expediting the diagnosis of eye diseases and systemic disorders 1 . However, the development of AI models requires substantial annotation and models are usually task-specific with limited generalizability to different clinical applications 2 . Here, we present RETFound, a foundation model for retinal images that learns generalizable representations from unlabelled retinal images and provides a basis for label-efficient model adaptation in several applications. Specifically, RETFound is trained on 1.6 million unlabelled retinal images by means of self-supervised learning and then adapted to disease detection tasks with explicit labels. We show that adapted RETFound consistently outperforms several comparison models in the diagnosis and prognosis of sight-threatening eye diseases, as well as incident prediction of complex systemic disorders such as heart failure and myocardial infarction with fewer labelled data. RETFound provides a generalizable solution to improve model performance and alleviate the annotation workload of experts to enable broad clinical AI applications from retinal imaging.

The First International Consensus on Mucous Membrane Pemphigoid
Lawrence S. Chan, A. Razzaque Ahmed, Grant J. Anhalt, Wolfgang Bernauer +4 more
2002· Archives of Dermatology783doi:10.1001/archderm.138.3.370

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop consensus-based recommendations for streamlining medical communication among various health care professionals, to improve accuracy of diagnosis and treatment, and to facilitate future investigations for mucous membrane pemphigoid. PARTICIPANTS: Because of the highly specific nature of this group of diseases, the 26 invited participants included either international scholars in the field of mucous membrane pemphigoid or experts in cutaneous pharmacology representing the 3 medical disciplines ophthalmology, oral medicine, and dermatology. EVIDENCE: The first author (L.S.C.) conducted a literature search. Based on the information obtained, international experts who had contributed to the literature in the clinical care, diagnosis, and laboratory investigation for mucous membrane pemphigoid were invited to participate in a consensus meeting aimed at developing a consensus statement. CONSENSUS PROCESS: A consensus meeting was convened and conducted on May 10, 1999, in Chicago, Ill, to discuss the relevant issues. The first author drafted the statement based on the consensus developed at the meeting and the participants' written comments. The draft was submitted to all participants for 3 separate rounds of review, and disagreements were reconciled based on literature evidence. The third and final statement incorporated all relevant evidence obtained in the literature search and the consensus developed by the participants. The final statement was approved and endorsed by all 26 participants. CONCLUSIONS: Specific consensus-based recommendations were made regarding the definition, diagnostic criteria, pathogenic factors, medical treatment, and prognostic indicators for mucous membrane pemphigoid. A system of standard reporting for these patients was proposed to facilitate a uniform data collection.

A comparison of the causes of blindness certifications in England and Wales in working age adults (16–64 years), 1999–2000 with 2009–2010
Gerald Liew, Michel Michaelides, Catey Bunce
2014· BMJ Open657doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004015

OBJECTIVES: To report on the causes of blindness certifications in England and Wales in working age adults (16-64 years) in 2009-2010; and to compare these with figures from 1999 to 2000. DESIGN: Analysis of the national database of blindness certificates of vision impairment (CVIs) received by the Certifications Office. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Working age (16-64 years) population of England and Wales. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number and cause of blindness certifications. RESULTS: The Certifications Office received 1756 CVIs for blindness from persons aged between 16 and 64 inclusive between 1 April 2009 and 31 March 2010. The main causes of blindness certifications were hereditary retinal disorders (354 certifications comprising 20.2% of the total), diabetic retinopathy/maculopathy (253 persons, 14.4%) and optic atrophy (248 persons, 14.1%). Together, these three leading causes accounted for almost 50% of all blindness certifications. Between 1 April 1999 and 31 March 2000, the leading causes of blindness certification were diabetic retinopathy/maculopathy (17.7%), hereditary retinal disorders (15.8%) and optic atrophy (10.1%). CONCLUSIONS: For the first time in at least five decades, diabetic retinopathy/maculopathy is no longer the leading cause of certifiable blindness among working age adults in England and Wales, having been overtaken by inherited retinal disorders. This change may be related to factors including the introduction of nationwide diabetic retinopathy screening programmes in England and Wales and improved glycaemic control. Inherited retinal disease, now representing the commonest cause of certification in the working age population, has clinical and research implications, including with respect to the provision of care/resources in the NHS and the allocation of research funding.

Glaucoma in Adults—Screening, Diagnosis, and Management
Joshua D. Stein, Anthony P. Khawaja, Jennifer S. Weizer
2021· JAMA656doi:10.1001/jama.2020.21899

Importance: Glaucoma is the most common cause of irreversible blindness worldwide. Many patients with glaucoma are asymptomatic early in the disease course. Primary care clinicians should know which patients to refer to an eye care professional for a complete eye examination to check for signs of glaucoma and to determine what systemic conditions or medications can increase a patient's risk of glaucoma. Open-angle and narrow-angle forms of glaucoma are reviewed, including a description of the pathophysiology, risk factors, screening, disease monitoring, and treatment options. Observations: Glaucoma is a chronic progressive optic neuropathy, characterized by damage to the optic nerve and retinal nerve fiber layer, that can lead to permanent loss of peripheral or central vision. Intraocular pressure is the only known modifiable risk factor. Other important risk factors include older age, nonwhite race, and a family history of glaucoma. Several systemic medical conditions and medications including corticosteroids, anticholinergics, certain antidepressants, and topiramate may predispose patients to glaucoma. There are 2 broad categories of glaucoma, open-angle and angle-closure glaucoma. Diagnostic testing to assess for glaucoma and to monitor for disease progression includes measurement of intraocular pressure, perimetry, and optical coherence tomography. Treatment of glaucoma involves lowering intraocular pressure. This can be achieved with various classes of glaucoma medications as well as laser and incisional surgical procedures. Conclusions and Relevance: Vision loss from glaucoma can be minimized by recognizing systemic conditions and medications that increase a patient's risk of glaucoma and referring high-risk patients for a complete ophthalmologic examination. Clinicians should ensure that patients remain adherent with taking glaucoma medications and should monitor for adverse events from medical or surgical interventions used to treat glaucoma.

Latanoprost for open-angle glaucoma (UKGTS): a randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled trial
David F. Garway‐Heath, David P. Crabb, Catey Bunce, Gerassimos Lascaratos +4 more
2014· The Lancet650doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(14)62111-5

BACKGROUND: Treatments for open-angle glaucoma aim to prevent vision loss through lowering of intraocular pressure, but to our knowledge no placebo-controlled trials have assessed visual function preservation, and the observation periods of previous (unmasked) trials have typically been at least 5 years. We assessed vision preservation in patients given latanoprost compared with those given placebo. METHODS: In this randomised, triple-masked, placebo-controlled trial, we enrolled patients with newly diagnosed open-angle glaucoma at ten UK centres (tertiary referral centres, teaching hospitals, and district general hospitals). Eligible patients were randomly allocated (1:1) with a website-generated randomisation schedule, stratified by centre and with a permuted block design, to receive either latanoprost 0·005% (intervention group) or placebo (control group) eye drops. Drops were administered from identical bottles, once a day, to both eyes. The primary outcome was time to visual field deterioration within 24 months. Analyses were done in all individuals with follow-up data. The Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) recommended stopping the trial on Jan 6, 2011 (last patient visit July, 2011), after an interim analysis, and suggested a change in primary outcome from the difference in proportions of patients with incident progression between groups to time to visual field deterioration within 24 months. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN96423140. FINDINGS: We enrolled 516 individuals between Dec 1, 2006, and March 16, 2010. Baseline mean intraocular pressure was 19·6 mm Hg (SD 4·6) in 258 patients in the latanoprost group and 20·1 mm Hg (4·8) in 258 controls. At 24 months, mean reduction in intraocular pressure was 3·8 mm Hg (4·0) in 231 patients assessed in the latanoprost group and 0·9 mm Hg (3·8) in 230 patients assessed in the placebo group. Visual field preservation was significantly longer in the latanoprost group than in the placebo group: adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0·44 (95% CI 0·28-0·69; p=0·0003). We noted 18 serious adverse events, none attributable to the study drug. INTERPRETATION: This is the first randomised placebo-controlled trial to show preservation of the visual field with an intraocular-pressure-lowering drug in patients with open-angle glaucoma. The study design enabled significant differences in vision to be assessed in a relatively short observation period. FUNDING: Pfizer, UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre.

Guidelines for clinical trial protocols for interventions involving artificial intelligence: the SPIRIT-AI extension
Samantha Cruz Rivera, Xiaoxuan Liu, An‐Wen Chan, Alastair K. Denniston +4 more
2020· Nature Medicine585doi:10.1038/s41591-020-1037-7

The SPIRIT 2013 statement aims to improve the completeness of clinical trial protocol reporting by providing evidence-based recommendations for the minimum set of items to be addressed. This guidance has been instrumental in promoting transparent evaluation of new interventions. More recently, there has been a growing recognition that interventions involving artificial intelligence (AI) need to undergo rigorous, prospective evaluation to demonstrate their impact on health outcomes. The SPIRIT-AI (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials-Artificial Intelligence) extension is a new reporting guideline for clinical trial protocols evaluating interventions with an AI component. It was developed in parallel with its companion statement for trial reports: CONSORT-AI (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials-Artificial Intelligence). Both guidelines were developed through a staged consensus process involving literature review and expert consultation to generate 26 candidate items, which were consulted upon by an international multi-stakeholder group in a two-stage Delphi survey (103 stakeholders), agreed upon in a consensus meeting (31 stakeholders) and refined through a checklist pilot (34 participants). The SPIRIT-AI extension includes 15 new items that were considered sufficiently important for clinical trial protocols of AI interventions. These new items should be routinely reported in addition to the core SPIRIT 2013 items. SPIRIT-AI recommends that investigators provide clear descriptions of the AI intervention, including instructions and skills required for use, the setting in which the AI intervention will be integrated, considerations for the handling of input and output data, the human-AI interaction and analysis of error cases. SPIRIT-AI will help promote transparency and completeness for clinical trial protocols for AI interventions. Its use will assist editors and peer reviewers, as well as the general readership, to understand, interpret and critically appraise the design and risk of bias for a planned clinical trial.

Reporting guidelines for clinical trial reports for interventions involving artificial intelligence: the CONSORT-AI Extension
Xiaoxuan Liu, Samantha Cruz Rivera, David Moher, Melanie Calvert +1 more
2020· BMJ565doi:10.1136/bmj.m3164

The CONSORT 2010 (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement provides minimum guidelines for reporting randomised trials. Its widespread use has been instrumental in ensuring transparency when evaluating new interventions. More recently, there has been a growing recognition that interventions involving artificial intelligence (AI) need to undergo rigorous, prospective evaluation to demonstrate impact on health outcomes.The CONSORT-AI extension is a new reporting guideline for clinical trials evaluating interventions with an AI component. It was developed in parallel with its companion statement for clinical trial protocols: SPIRIT-AI. Both guidelines were developed through a staged consensus process, involving a literature review and expert consultation to generate 29 candidate items, which were assessed by an international multi-stakeholder group in a two-stage Delphi survey (103 stakeholders), agreed on in a two-day consensus meeting (31 stakeholders) and refined through a checklist pilot (34 participants).The CONSORT-AI extension includes 14 new items, which were considered sufficiently important for AI interventions, that they should be routinely reported in addition to the core CONSORT 2010 items. CONSORT-AI recommends that investigators provide clear descriptions of the AI intervention, including instructions and skills required for use, the setting in which the AI intervention is integrated, the handling of inputs and outputs of the AI intervention, the human-AI interaction and providing analysis of error cases.CONSORT-AI will help promote transparency and completeness in reporting clinical trials for AI interventions. It will assist editors and peer-reviewers, as well as the general readership, to understand, interpret and critically appraise the quality of clinical trial design and risk of bias in the reported outcomes.

ISCEV Standard for full-field clinical electroretinography (2022 update)
Anthony G. Robson, Laura J. Frishman, John Grigg, Ruth Hamilton +4 more
2022· Documenta Ophthalmologica538doi:10.1007/s10633-022-09872-0

The full-field electroretinogram (ERG) is a mass electrophysiological response to diffuse flashes of light and is used widely to assess generalized retinal function. This document, from the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision (ISCEV), presents an updated and revised ISCEV Standard for clinical ERG testing. Minimum protocols for basic ERG stimuli, recording methods and reporting are specified, to promote consistency of methods for diagnosis, monitoring and inter-laboratory comparisons, while also responding to evolving clinical practices and technology. The main changes in this updated ISCEV Standard for clinical ERGs include specifying that ERGs may meet the Standard without mydriasis, providing stimuli adequately compensate for non-dilated pupils. There is more detail about analysis of dark-adapted oscillatory potentials (OPs) and the document format has been updated and supplementary content reduced. There is a more detailed review of the origins of the major ERG components. Several tests previously tabulated as additional ERG protocols are now cited as published ISCEV extended protocols. A non-standard abbreviated ERG protocol is described, for use when patient age, compliance or other circumstances preclude ISCEV Standard ERG testing.

Selective laser trabeculoplasty versus eye drops for first-line treatment of ocular hypertension and glaucoma (LiGHT): a multicentre randomised controlled trial
Gus Gazzard, Evgenia Konstantakopoulou, David F. Garway‐Heath, Anurag Garg +4 more
2019· The Lancet536doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)32213-x

BACKGROUND: Primary open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension are habitually treated with eye drops that lower intraocular pressure. Selective laser trabeculoplasty is a safe alternative but is rarely used as first-line treatment. We compared the two. METHODS: In this observer-masked, randomised controlled trial treatment-naive patients with open angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension and no ocular comorbidities were recruited between 2012 and 2014 at six UK hospitals. They were randomly allocated (web-based randomisation) to initial selective laser trabeculoplasty or to eye drops. An objective target intraocular pressure was set according to glaucoma severity. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at 3 years (assessed by EQ-5D). Secondary outcomes were cost and cost-effectiveness, disease-specific HRQoL, clinical effectiveness, and safety. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered at controlled-trials.com (ISRCTN32038223). FINDINGS: Of 718 patients enrolled, 356 were randomised to the selective laser trabeculoplasty and 362 to the eye drops group. 652 (91%) returned the primary outcome questionnaire at 36 months. Average EQ-5D score was 0·89 (SD 0·18) in the selective laser trabeculoplasty group versus 0·90 (SD 0·16) in the eye drops group, with no significant difference (difference 0·01, 95% CI -0·01 to 0·03; p=0·23). At 36 months, 74·2% (95% CI 69·3-78·6) of patients in the selective laser trabeculoplasty group required no drops to maintain intraocular pressure at target. Eyes of patients in the selective laser trabeculoplasty group were within target intracoluar pressure at more visits (93·0%) than in the eye drops group (91·3%), with glaucoma surgery to lower intraocular pressure required in none versus 11 patients. Over 36 months, from an ophthalmology cost perspective, there was a 97% probability of selective laser trabeculoplasty as first treatment being more cost-effective than eye drops first at a willingness to pay of £20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. INTERPRETATION: Selective laser trabeculoplasty should be offered as a first-line treatment for open angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension, supporting a change in clinical practice. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research, Health and Technology Assessment Programme.

Distribution of fundus autofluorescence with a scanning laser ophthalmoscope.
Andrea von Rückmann, Fred W. Fitzke, Alan C. Bird
1995· British Journal of Ophthalmology520doi:10.1136/bjo.79.5.407

BACKGROUND: Variation of fluorescence derived from lipofuscin in the retinal pigment epithelium has been recorded with age and in retinal diseases. Studies have been based largely on in vitro observations on eye bank eyes which has placed severe limitations on the data available. METHODS: A technique is described whereby in vivo imaging of autofluorescence of the fundus was achieved using a scanning laser ophthalmoscope. RESULTS: The optical characteristics, distribution, and variation with disease imply that the fluorescence is derived from lipofuscin in the pigment epithelium. Autofluorescence is shown to be abnormally high in certain inherited diseases, and low in the presence of retinal atrophy. CONCLUSION: This technique may be useful both in clinical practice and research. It may allow the detection of the abnormal phenotype in genetically determined disease at a time when other techniques may not. Longitudinal studies of age related macular disease would permit correlation between changes in the pigment epithelium and Bruch's membrane to be established.

Global variations and time trends in the prevalence of primary open angle glaucoma (POAG): a systematic review and meta-analysis
Venediktos Kapetanakis, Michelle Chan, Paul J. Foster, Derek G. Cook +2 more
2015· British Journal of Ophthalmology508doi:10.1136/bjophthalmol-2015-307223

Systematic review of published population based surveys to examine the relationship between primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) prevalence and demographic factors. A literature search identified population-based studies with quantitative estimates of POAG prevalence (to October 2014). Multilevel binomial logistic regression of log-odds of POAG was used to examine the effect of age and gender among populations of different geographical and ethnic origins, adjusting for study design factors. Eighty-one studies were included (37 countries, 216 214 participants, 5266 POAG cases). Black populations showed highest POAG prevalence, with 5.2% (95% credible interval (CrI) 3.7%, 7.2%) at 60 years, rising to 12.2% (95% CrI 8.9% to 16.6%) at 80 years. Increase in POAG prevalence per decade of age was greatest among Hispanics (2.31, 95% CrI 2.12, 2.52) and White populations (1.99, 95% CrI 1.86, 2.12), and lowest in East and South Asians (1.48, 95% CrI 1.39, 1.57; 1.56, 95% CrI 1.31, 1.88, respectively). Men were more likely to have POAG than women (1.30, 95% CrI 1.22, 1.41). Older studies had lower POAG prevalence, which was related to the inclusion of intraocular pressure in the glaucoma definition. Studies with visual field data on all participants had a higher POAG prevalence than those with visual field data on a subset. Globally 57.5 million people (95% CI 46.4 to 73.1 million) were affected by POAG in 2015, rising to 65.5 million (95% CrI 52.8, 83.2 million) by 2020. This systematic review provides the most precise estimates of POAG prevalence and shows omitting routine visual field assessment in population surveys may have affected case ascertainment. Our findings will be useful to future studies and healthcare planning.

Detection of Keratoconus With a New Biomechanical Index
Riccardo Vinciguerra, Renato Ambrósio, Ahmed Elsheikh, Cynthia J. Roberts +4 more
2016· Journal of Refractive Surgery500doi:10.3928/1081597x-20160629-01

PURPOSE: To evaluate the ability of a new combined biomechanical index called the Corvis Biomechanical Index (CBI) based on corneal thickness profile and deformation parameters to separate normal from keratoconic patients. METHODS: Six hundred fifty-eight patients (329 eyes in each database) were included in this multicenter retrospective study. Patients from two clinics located on different continents were selected to test the capability of the CBI to separate healthy and keratoconic eyes in more than one ethnic group using the Corvis ST (Oculus Optikgeräte GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany). Logistic regression was employed to determine, based on Database 1 as the development dataset, the optimal combination of parameters to accurately separate normal from keratoconic eyes. The CBI was subsequently independently validated on Database 2. RESULTS: The CBI included several dynamic corneal response parameters: deformation amplitude ratio at 1 and 2 mm, applanation 1 velocity, standard deviation of deformation amplitude at highest concavity, Ambrósio's Relational Thickness to the horizontal profile, and a novel stiffness parameter. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of the training database showed an area under the curve of 0.983. With a cut-off value of 0.5, 98.2% of the cases were correctly classified with 100% specificity and 94.1% sensitivity. In the validation dataset, the same cut-off point correctly classified 98.8% of the cases with 98.4% specificity and 100% sensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: The CBI was shown to be highly sensitive and specific to separate healthy from keratoconic eyes. The presence of an external validation dataset confirms this finding and suggests the possible use of the CBI in everyday clinical practice to aid in the diagnosis of keratoconus. [J Refract Surg. 2016;32(12):803-810.].

The epidemiology of rhegmatogenous retinal detachment: geographical variation and clinical associations
Danny Mitry, David G. Charteris, Brian W. Fleck, Harry Campbell +1 more
2009· British Journal of Ophthalmology494doi:10.1136/bjo.2009.157727

AIMS/BACKGROUND: Rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) is a potentially blinding condition. Obtaining an accurate estimate of RRD incidence in the population is essential in understanding the healthcare burden related to this disorder. METHODS: A systematic review of all population-based epidemiology studies of RRD published between January 1970 and January 2009 from Medline database searches was performed. RESULTS: RRD incidence demonstrates significant geographical variation and its incidence has been reported to be between 6.3 and 17.9 per 100,000 population. For studies with a sample size >300 the median annual incidence per 100,000 population was 10.5 (IQR 8.1-13.2) and the mean proportion of bilateral RRD was 7.26%. Overall, the mean prevalence of lattice degeneration was 45.7+/-20.3% and myopia was 47.28+/-12.59%. CONCLUSIONS: Estimates of RRD incidence have varied threefold, but inclusion criteria and other design features have differed across studies making direct comparisons difficult. The overall incidence of RRD is not yet well established: more incidence studies of adequate methodology are needed to explore temporal changes in incidence. RRD incidence varies with ethnicity and is strongly associated with increasing age, myopia and certain vitreo-retinal degenerations. Due to changes in cataract surgery trends, the proportion of pseudophakic RRD presenting to specialised centres appears to be increasing.