The Heidelberg Retina Tomograph v clinical impreion in the diagnoi of glaucoma

PURPOE: To compare the enitivity and the pecificity of the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph (HRT) claification of “Glaucoma” or “Normal” with that derived from clinical impreion (CI) baed on everal parameter. DEIGN: Conecutive obervational cae erie. METHOD: In a retropective chart review of 200 left eye of 200 conecutive patient referred to the Glaucoma ervice Diagnotic Laboratory of the Will Eye Hopital, we compared the HRT-baed claification of “Glaucoma” or “Normal” with a CI claification of “Definite glaucoma,” “Probably glaucoma,” “Probably no glaucoma,” and “No glaucoma.” REULT: The HRT-baed diagnoi of “Glaucoma” or “Normal” had an 86% enitivity and 68% pecificity when compared with a clinical impreion (CI) of “Definite glaucoma,” ued a a trict gold tandard definition of glaucoma; an 83% enitivity and 57% pecificity when the CI “Definite glaucoma” and “Probably glaucoma” were combined a a more liberal definition of glaucoma; a 76% enitivity and 69% pecificity when the CI “Definite glaucoma,” “Probably glaucoma,” and “Probably no glaucoma” were combined a the mot liberal definition of glaucoma. The HRT diagnoi had an 86% enitivity and 51% pecificity when compared with the group “Probably glaucoma,” “Probably no glaucoma,” and “No glaucoma” combined and conidered a no glaucoma. CONCLUION: In thi tudy, HRT-baed claification of “Glaucoma” or “Normal” wa moderately enitive, but not very pecific when compared with the clinical impreion a the gold tandard. Clinician hould not rely on the HRT diagnoi alone, but hould ue it to upplement the impreion baed on an eye examination and other ancillary tet.