AIM: To evaluate the long-term perimetric fluctuation (LF) in patients with different stages of glaucoma according to the Glaucoma Staging System 2 (GSS2). METHODS: This multicentre retrospective study included 161 eyes of 161 stable glaucoma patients undergoing four visual-field tests (Humphrey SITA-Standard program over the central 24° or 30°) over a 2-year period. For each patient, the stage of the disease was classified according to GSS2. LF was then calculated as the mean of the standard deviations of point-to-point threshold sensitivities in the four repetitions. LF in GSS2 stages was compared using the t test. Results LF progressively increased from stage 0 to stage 4, and then decreased at stage 5. Stage 4 had a peak of 3.19 ± 0.94 dB, with statistically significant differences compared with all the other stages. The lowest LF (1.65 ± 0.60 dB) was found for normal subjects, whereas similar data were found for borderline patients and those at stages 1 and 5 (2.09 ± 0.58, 2.13 ± 0.57 and 2.22 ± 0.89 dB, respectively; p > 0.13). Visual fields with generalised defects had a lower LF (1.90 ± 0.81) than those with mixed (2.84 ± 0.87, p = 0.0003) and localised (2.63 ± 0.72, p = 0.004) defects. Conclusions In this study, the authors showed that the lower the visual-field defect, the lower was LF, except at stage 5 of GSS2. As test-retest changes exceeding LF could represent a sign of progression, the authors suggest that clinicians using this classification system calculate LF, in order to better differentiate true progression from variability.
AIM: To evaluate the long-term perimetric fluctuation (LF) in patients with different stages of glaucoma according to the Glaucoma Staging System 2 (GSS2). METHODS: This multicentre retrospective study included 161 eyes of 161 stable glaucomapatients undergoing four visual-field tests (Humphrey SITA-Standard program over the central 24° or 30°) over a 2-year period. For each patient, the stage of the disease was classified according to GSS2. LF was then calculated as the mean of the standard deviations of point-to-point threshold sensitivities in the four repetitions. LF in GSS2 stages was compared using the t test. Results LF progressively increased from stage 0 to stage 4, and then decreased at stage 5. Stage 4 had a peak of 3.19 ± 0.94 dB, with statistically significant differences compared with all the other stages. The lowest LF (1.65 ± 0.60 dB) was found for normal subjects, whereas similar data were found for borderline patients and those at stages 1 and 5 (2.09 ± 0.58, 2.13 ± 0.57 and 2.22 ± 0.89 dB, respectively; p > 0.13). Visual fields with generalised defects had a lower LF (1.90 ± 0.81) than those with mixed (2.84 ± 0.87, p = 0.0003) and localised (2.63 ± 0.72, p = 0.004) defects. Conclusions In this study, the authors showed that the lower the visual-field defect, the lower was LF, except at stage 5 of GSS2. As test-retest changes exceeding LF could represent a sign of progression, the authors suggest that clinicians using this classification system calculate LF, in order to better differentiate true progression from variability.
Authors: Ryo Asaoka; Richard A Russell; Rizwan Malik; David F Garway-Heath; David P Crabb Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2012-12-07 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Swarup S Swaminathan; Alessandro A Jammal; Helen L Kornmann; Philip P Chen; William J Feuer; Felipe A Medeiros; Steven J Gedde Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2020-03-04 Impact factor: 14.277
Authors: Mirian Ara; Antonio Ferreras; Ana B Pajarin; Pilar Calvo; Michele Figus; Paolo Frezzotti Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2015-06-22 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Beatriz Abadia; Antonio Ferreras; Pilar Calvo; Mirian Ara; Blanca Ferrandez; Sofia Otin; Paolo Frezzotti; Luis E Pablo; Michele Figus Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2014-06-16 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Pilar Calvo; Antonio Ferreras; Beatriz Abadia; Mirian Ara; Michele Figus; Luis E Pablo; Paolo Frezzotti Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2014-07-06 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Ivano Riva; Lorenzo Legramandi; Eliana Rulli; Anastasios G Konstas; Andreas Katsanos; Francesco Oddone; Robert N Weinreb; Luciano Quaranta Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 4.379