OBJECTIVE: To assess agreement between longitudinal and cross-sectional analyses for determining visual field progression in data from the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study. METHODS: Visual field data from 3088 eyes of 1570 participants (median follow-up, 7 years) were analyzed. Longitudinal analyses were performed using change probability with total and pattern deviation, and cross-sectional analyses were performed using the glaucoma hemifield test, corrected pattern standard deviation, and mean deviation. The rates of mean deviation and general height change were compared to estimate the degree of diffuse loss in emerging glaucoma. RESULTS: Agreement on progression in longitudinal and cross-sectional analyses ranged from 50% to 61% and remained nearly constant across a wide range of criteria. In contrast, agreement on absence of progression ranged from 97.0% to 99.7%, being highest for the stricter criteria. Analyses of pattern deviation were more conservative than analyses of total deviation, with a 3 to 5 times lesser incidence of progression. Most participants developing field loss had both diffuse and focal changes. CONCLUSIONS: Despite considerable overall agreement, 40% to 50% of eyes identified as having progressed with either longitudinal or cross-sectional analyses were identified with only one of the analyses. Because diffuse change is part of early glaucomatous damage, pattern deviation analyses may underestimate progression in patients with ocular hypertension.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To assess agreement between longitudinal and cross-sectional analyses for determining visual field progression in data from the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study. METHODS: Visual field data from 3088 eyes of 1570 participants (median follow-up, 7 years) were analyzed. Longitudinal analyses were performed using change probability with total and pattern deviation, and cross-sectional analyses were performed using the glaucoma hemifield test, corrected pattern standard deviation, and mean deviation. The rates of mean deviation and general height change were compared to estimate the degree of diffuse loss in emerging glaucoma. RESULTS: Agreement on progression in longitudinal and cross-sectional analyses ranged from 50% to 61% and remained nearly constant across a wide range of criteria. In contrast, agreement on absence of progression ranged from 97.0% to 99.7%, being highest for the stricter criteria. Analyses of pattern deviation were more conservative than analyses of total deviation, with a 3 to 5 times lesser incidence of progression. Most participants developing field loss had both diffuse and focal changes. CONCLUSIONS: Despite considerable overall agreement, 40% to 50% of eyes identified as having progressed with either longitudinal or cross-sectional analyses were identified with only one of the analyses. Because diffuse change is part of early glaucomatous damage, pattern deviation analyses may underestimate progression in patients with ocular hypertension.
Authors: Michael A Kass; Dale K Heuer; Eve J Higginbotham; Chris A Johnson; John L Keltner; J Philip Miller; Richard K Parrish; M Roy Wilson; Mae O Gordon Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2002-06
Authors: Chris A Johnson; John L Keltner; Kimberly E Cello; Mary Edwards; Michael A Kass; Mae O Gordon; Donald L Budenz; Douglas E Gaasterland; Elliot Werner Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2002-03 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: John L Keltner; Chris A Johnson; Kimberly E Cello; Shannan E Bandermann; Juanjuan Fan; Richard A Levine; Michael A Kass; Mae O Gordon Journal: J Glaucoma Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Mauro T Leite; Linda M Zangwill; Robert N Weinreb; Harsha L Rao; Luciana M Alencar; Felipe A Medeiros Journal: J Glaucoma Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Abinaya Thenappan; Carlos Gustavo De Moraes; Diane L Wang; Daiyan Xin; Ravivarn Jarukasetphon; Robert Ritch; Donald C Hood Journal: J Glaucoma Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Donald C Hood; Anastasia Slobodnick; Ali S Raza; Carlos Gustavo de Moraes; Christopher C Teng; Robert Ritch Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2014-02-03 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Ilana Traynis; Carlos G De Moraes; Ali S Raza; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Robert Ritch; Donald C Hood Journal: JAMA Ophthalmol Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 7.389
Authors: Felipe A Medeiros; Renato Lisboa; Robert N Weinreb; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Christopher Girkin; Linda M Zangwill Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2012-12-12 Impact factor: 12.079