Diagnostic Performance of the PalmScan VF2000 Virtual Reality Visual Field Analyzer for Identification and Classification of Glaucoma

Purpose: To evaluate the diagnostic test properties of the Palm Scan VF2000® Virtual Reality Visual Field Analyzer for diagnosis and classification of the severity of glaucoma. Methods: This study was a prospective cross-sectional analysis of 166 eyes from 97 participants. All of them were examined by the Humphrey® Field Analyzer (used as the gold standard) and the Palm Scan VF 2000® Virtual Reality Visual Field Analyzer on the same day by the same examiner. We estimated the kappa statistic (including 95% confidence interval [CI]) as a measure of agreement between these two methods. The diagnostic test properties were assessed using sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Results: The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV for the Virtual Reality Visual Field Analyzer for the classification of individuals as glaucoma/non-glaucoma was 100%. The general agreement for the classification of glaucoma between these two instruments was 0.63 (95% CI: 0.56–0.78). The agreement for mild glaucoma was 0.76 (95% CI: 0.61–0.92), for moderate glaucoma was 0.37 (0.14–0.60), and for severe glaucoma was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.55–0.85). About 28% of moderate glaucoma cases were misclassified as mild and 17% were misclassified as severe by the virtual reality visual field analyzer. Furthermore, 20% of severe cases were misclassified as moderate by this instrument. Conclusion: The instrument is 100% sensitive and specific in detection of glaucoma. However, among patients with glaucoma, there is a relatively high proportion of misclassification of severity of glaucoma. Thus, although useful for screening of glaucoma, it cannot replace the Humphrey® Field Analyzer for the clinical management in its current form

Individual and Combined Effects of Diabetes and Glaucoma on Total Macular Thickness and Ganglion Cell Complex Thickness: A Cross-sectional Analysis

Purpose: Presence of diabetes in glaucoma patients may influence findings while documenting the progression of glaucoma. We conducted the study to compare individual and combined effects of diabetes and glaucoma on macular thickness and ganglion cell complex thickness. Methods: The present study is a cross-sectional analysis of 172 eyes of 114 individuals. The groups were categorized according to the following conditions: glaucoma, diabetes mellitus, both glaucoma and diabetes (‘both’ group), and none of these conditions (‘none’ group). Patients with diabetes did not have diabetic retinopathy (DR). We compared retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness, ganglion cell complex (GCC) thickness, foveal loss of volume (FLV), and global loss of volume (GLV) among the groups. We used random effects multivariate analysis to adjust for potential confounders. Results: The mean (SD) age of these individuals was 60.7 (10.1) years. The total average RNFL and GCC were significantly lower in the glaucoma group (RNFL: –36.27, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: –42.79 to –29.74; P < 0.05, and GCC: –26.24, 95% CI: –31.49 to –20.98; P < 0.05) and the ‘both’ group (RNFL: –24.74, 95% CI: –32.84 to –16.63; P < 0.05, and GCC: –17.92, 95% CI: –24.58 to –11.26; P < 0.05) as compared with the ‘none’ group. There were no significant differences in the average RNFL values and total average GCC between the diabetes group and the ‘none’ group. The values of FLV and GLV were significantly higher in the ‘glaucoma’ group and the ‘both’ group as compared with the ‘none’ group. The foveal values were not significantly different across these four groups. Among the glaucoma cases, 25% were mild, 30% were moderate, and 45% were severe; there was no significant difference in the proportion of severity of glaucoma between the ‘glaucoma only’ and ‘both’ groups (P = 0.32). After adjusting for severity and type of glaucoma, there were no statistically significant differences in the values of average RNFL (6.6, 95% CI: –1.9 to 15.2; P = 0.13), total average GCC (3.6, -95% CI: –2.4 to 9.6; P = 0.24), and GLV (–3.9, 95% CI: –9.5 to 1.6; P = 0.16) in the ‘both group’ as compared with the glaucoma only group. Conclusion: We found that diabetes with no DR did not significantly affect the retinal parameters in patients with glaucoma. Thus, it is less likely that thickness of these parameters will be overestimated in patients with glaucoma who have concurrent diabetes without retinopathy

Lycaenidae parasitoids from peninsular India with description of four new species of microgastrine wasps (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) along with new insights on host relationships

Gupta, Ankita, Churi, Paresh V., Sengupta, Ashok, Mhatre, Sarang (2014): Lycaenidae parasitoids from peninsular India with description of four new species of microgastrine wasps (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) along with new insights on host relationships. Zootaxa 3827 (4): 439-470, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3827.4.

Not Available

Not AvailableIn the comprehensive rearing of lepidopterans from peninsular India, eleven species of Lycaenidae were parasitized by ten species of wasps. Four new taxa of lycaenid associated microgastrine wasps Parapanteles eros Gupta n. sp., P. arka Gupta n. sp., P. esha Gupta n. sp., and P. regale Gupta n. sp. reared from Chilades pandava (Horsfield), Curetis thetis (Drury), Prosotas dubiosa (Semper), Tajuria cippus (Fabricius), respectively, are described with diagnostic details and illustrations along with documentation of six species of wasps viz., Apanteles folia, Apanteles sp., Protapanteles sp. 01 & 02 (Braconidae), Charops obtusus obtusus Morley (Ichneumonidae), and Brachymeria lasus (Walker) (Chalcididae). This is the first record of host-parasitoid association of lycaenid butterflies with Parapanteles. Wasps from three different families were recorded: Braconidae, Ichneumonidae, and Chalcididae. The parasitoid species were reared from the following Lycaenidae hosts: Anthene lycaenina (Felder), Arhopala amantes Hewitson, Chilades pandava (Horsfield), Curetis thetis (Drury), Jamides celeno (Cramer), Prosotas dubiosa (Semper), Rathinda amor (Fabricius), Spindasis vulcanus (Fabricius), Tajuria cippus (Fabricius), Tarucus balkanicus nigra Bethune-Baker, and Tarucus callinara Butler. All lycaenids were collected from peninsular India, except T. callinara (central India). A comparative account of all newly described species is provided along with the detailed illustrated description and differences vis-à-vis its closely allied Indian species. Also a comprehensive table comprising parasitoid species, associated host, stage of parasitism, and nature of cocoon is provided.Not Availabl