Fig 1.
Image from one participant showing the four segmented boundaries and four retinal layers listed in Table 1.
Table 1.
The outer retinal layers segmented from OCT H and V b-scans.
Fig 2.
SAP acquisition and HOV representation.
(a) Right-eye full-field 164-point SAP test grid pattern, which spans 140° horizontally and 130° vertically. The expected location of the natural blind spot is outlined in red. (b) Example Octopus perimeter sensitivity map for one participant. (c) Top-down view of the interpolated HOV surface for this participant, with the test grid locations shown as white circles. The surface height represents the visual field sensitivity. (d) Octopus sensitivity map for a healthy normal, for comparison.
Fig 3.
Registration of anatomic and functional data.
(a) The IR fundus image (top) and the HOV sensitivity surface (bottom) were first registered automatically by aligning the fovea (magenta diamond) with the center visual field point (black circle). The diamond’s x and y coordinates were derived from the H and V b-scans, respectively. The green lines on the IR image indicate the H and V b-scan locations. The black square on the HOV represents the IR image size (30°). The HOV has been reflected to match the fundus orientation. (b) The HOV was then manually shifted until the natural scotoma was aligned with the optic disc. The white dots indicate the locations of SAP test grid, and the radius of each white circle corresponds to a size V stimulus. (c) For HOVs with no natural scotoma, the optic disc was aligned with the expected location of the blind spot (white polygon). (d) Aligned OCT b-scans and HOV with contour lines for the case shown in b. (e) Close-up of central field. A relationship is evident between steep depressions in the HOV surface and the edges of the EZ (the yellow line labeled PR1 on the b-scans).
Table 2.
Structural biomarkers extracted from OCT b-scans.
Table 3.
Functional biomarkers extracted from SAP visual fields.
Fig 4.
Each row illustrates a different visual field pattern. (a,d,g) Full-field HOV sensitivity surfaces (gray) overlaid with eight radial spokes color-coded by slope. The white box and arrows indicate the location and orientation of the central 30° region. (b,e,h) The radial gradients of the HOV in the central 30°, with a gray line indicating the HOV slope contour. Discontinuities along the contour are indicated by a dotted gray line. (c,f,i) Top-down view of the HOV sensitivity surfaces. The radius of the white dashed circle is the mean radial distance to the HOV slope contour from the center point (d∇S,AVG). The ring scotoma example is from the same data as Fig 3C–3E.
Table 4.
The three fixed-effects models tested for each structure-function relationship.
Fig 5.
Heat maps of (fixed-effects goodness of fit) for the best-fit models for each structure-function relationship.
Each row is a different functional biomarker, and each column is a different structural biomarker. The first five rows are global measures from the entire HOV, and the last four are local measures from functional data along the b-scan line. For each functional biomarker, the median (mixed-effects fit) across all structural biomarkers is shown. Superscripts H or V indicate the b-scan direction, and * indicates statistical significance.
Fig 6.
Mixed-effects modeling of several functional relationships with EZ width.
The top graphs show the H-oriented measures, and the bottom show the V measures. Raw biomarker values are represented by blue dots and MEM fitted values by magenta dots. The black line is the fixed-effects population mean. These plots depict 6 of the 162 relationships summarized in Fig 5.
Table 5.
Biomarkers that were significantly different between eyes (25 right-left pairs).
Table 6.
Values of hybrid structural-functional measures.