Discussion
In the present paper, we identify loss of horizontal macular GCC asymmetry as an OCT indicator of chiasmal compression. Loss of GCC asymmetry as a complementary OCT strategy increased the proportion of eyes in which OCT suggested compression of the optic chiasm region.
There is no universally accepted definition of compressive optic neuropathy. Although both functional and structural criteria can be used to define disease, the traditional gold standard method in the setting of optic chiasm compression is assessment of the visual function; perimetry has been the cornerstone of examination, whereas a structural correlate in the form of ophthalmoscopic optic nerve atrophy typically becomes evident in more advanced disease. Progress in OCT technology and image-processing techniques fundamentally change the ability to provide objective evidence of even early structural changes in compressive optic neuropathy. Equivalently, for glaucomatous optic neuropathy, current consensus is that the diagnosis of glaucoma no longer requires the detection of VF defects, as structural findings with modern imaging technology generally precede detectable functional deficits.12
In glaucoma, asymmetric findings between the superior and inferior hemispheres are well-established indicators of early disease. Such asymmetry can be demonstrated functionally with threshold perimetry and anatomically with OCT, and vertical ganglion cell asymmetry analysis is now even commercially available (Spectralis OCT, Heidelberg Engineering). On the other hand, neuro-ophthalmic diseases, including chiasmal compression, commonly respect the vertical meridian. However, to our knowledge, equivalent OCT algorithms for horizontal GCC asymmetry has not been developed or thoroughly studied.
The strong correlation between decreasing mean GCC thickness and decreasing mean hemispheric GCC asymmetry in the patient group confirmed the anticipated loss of normal horizontal GCC asymmetry in chiasmal compression. Notably, loss of GCC asymmetry co-occurred in most eyes with nasal GCC thinning but also in cases with GCC thickness within the reference ranges. While loss of GCC asymmetry in an individual patient does suggest thinning of the nasal GCC, OCT will not detect patient-specific GCC thinning within the 95% reference range. In this way, relative wide reference ranges due to interindividual variability of the normal GCC thickness limit OCT’s ability to detect early GCC thinning, especially in patients with higher initial GCC thicknesses. On the other hand, healthy individuals with thick or thin GCC might display similar asymmetry patterns, thereby minimising the effect of normal GCC thickness variability on GCC asymmetry. This may explain how OCT can demonstrate loss of GCC asymmetry without evidence of nasal thinning; the normal variability in GCC asymmetry is lower than that of each macular GCC sector per se, leading to narrower GCC asymmetry reference ranges and higher sensitivity for chiasmal syndromes.
At the same time, chiasmal syndrome manifestations are heterogeneous, and GCC thinning does not necessarily exclusively take place in the nasal hemisphere; any temporal GCC thinning will counteract loss of GCC asymmetry. Accordingly, a few eyes had nasal GCC thinning without loss of GCC asymmetry, whereas the complementary performances of the two parameters increased the proportion of eyes in which OCT suggested compression of the optic chiasm region.
One eye demonstrated a VF defects with normal OCT. As evidence implies OCT to be more sensitive than perimetry, a VF defect in the absence of GCC findings could be attributed to a false positive perimetry result. However, anatomical findings do not always, as a rule, precede functional deficits. While loss of visual function can develop rapidly (eg, traumatic optic neuropathy), OCT findings rely on a time-dependent mechanism (descending optic atrophy) to occur.13 Accordingly, within a limited time frame, isolated VF findings might also be found in cases of compressive optic neuropathy.
We found overlapping results between the two MRI grading methods: maximum suprasellar tumour extension and optic chiasm-tumour relationship. The overlap can be explained by anatomical variations in the distances between the suprasellar structures; individuals with shorter distances will reach higher grades of compression sooner in the setting of suprasellar tumour growth. When comparing the two MRI grading methods, maximum suprasellar tumour extension (in mm) seemed to predict the likelihood of clinical findings better than optic chiasm-tumour relationship (grades I–IV). Previous studies have shown a correlation between the degree of optic chiasm displacement on MRI and the likelihood of visual dysfunction, typically defined as a VF defect.10 14 15 Similarly, we found the prevalence of OCT findings to increase with suprasellar tumour extension. In particular, tumours extending≥14 mm suprasellary demonstrated a high prevalence of both VF and OCT findings. There was, however, no MRI cut-off for disease, as OCT indicated pathology in cases limited to tumour abutment. An explanation of this observation might be that MRI was unable to distinguish all cases of abutment from subtle chiasm-tumour compression. Spontaneous tumour shrinkage prior to the study examination can also have occurred. Moreover, in theory, gravitational forces on the brain could compress the optic chiasm more in the upright position, introducing a supine MRI bias. Nevertheless, although VF defects only concurred with MRI evidence of optic chiasm deformity, these OCT findings challenge the perimetry-based view that the optic chiasm is robust to dislocation and deformation.16
For non-functioning pituitary adenomas, guidelines consider the presence of a VF deficit due to compression a strong indication for surgery.1 2 An important concern in expectant management is the risk of permanent visual sequela if surgery is delayed awaiting development of a VF defect.17 Previous studies indicate that preoperative OCT findings have prognostic value; more demonstrable structural deterioration is associated with worse VF outcome.18–20 Thus, even with stable VF performances, significant changes in OCT parameters might have negative prognostic implications. As for glaucoma, an exclusively VF-based observation strategy could lead to delays in clinical decision-making; watchful waiting should necessitate close attention to both VF and OCT changes indicating disease progression.
The present study has several limitations. As we lack a better ‘gold standard’ test for comparison, false positive or negative results cannot be ruled out. There are relatively small sample sizes and tumour heterogeneity. The OCT images were only evaluated for nasal GCC thinning patterns suggesting compression of the optic chiasm region; occasional homonymous findings might present an inverted OCT pattern (temporal GCC thinning causing increased GCC asymmetry) in one eye. Finally, the GCC results were based on data as presented by the OCT software; as the macular GCC includes passing RNFL axons to peripheral RGCs, segmentation and analysis of the macular RGC layer exclusively might correspond better to localised atrophy in chiasmal compression.
In conclusion, loss of horizontal GCC asymmetry is an OCT indicator of chiasmal compression. Combining macular GCC thickness and horizontal GCC asymmetry in the clinical assessment increased the proportion of eyes in which OCT suggested compression of the optic chiasm region. The prevalence of both macular OCT and VF findings grew with suprasellar tumour extension. In several cases, however, structural findings on OCT preceded detectable VF deficits. Implementing horizontal GCC asymmetry analysis in OCT software solutions could improve OCT’s diagnostic performance in neuro-ophthalmology.