Toward a new definition of glaucomatous optic neuropathy for clinical research

Jayant Iyer, Jayme R. Vianna, Balwantray C. Chauhan, Harry A. Quigley

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

8 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose of review A process is ongoing to produce a definition of glaucomatous optic neuropathy (GON) using quantitative, objective data from structural and functional tests. At present, a common practice is to define GON by subjective features said to be 'characteristic' as judged by those experienced in glaucoma care. Recent findings An objective definition would standardize the comparison of clinical research results across studies, without precluding simultaneous use of idiosyncratic definitions in the same reports. To achieve this goal, expert opinion was solicited to reach optimal agreement on one or more consensus, GON definitions. An interactive period of online discussion by 176 international experts led to 110 responses in an online survey that narrowed possible definitional structures into testable criteria. Summary Two approaches to validation of one or more sets of criteria for definite and possible GON are ongoing. The general principles include definition for each eye individually, inclusion of a borderline category, no intraocular pressure criterion, and both structural and functional defects in appropriate physical locations. Each validation approach uses clinician diagnosis as a standard against which objective criteria are compared, with the initial approach using a three-level categorical scale, and the second approach using 0 - 100 scaling.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)85-90
Number of pages6
JournalCurrent opinion in ophthalmology
Volume31
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2020

Keywords

  • definition
  • glaucoma
  • optical coherence tomography
  • research
  • visual field

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Toward a new definition of glaucomatous optic neuropathy for clinical research'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this