Zhichao Wu1, Felipe A Medeiros2, Robert N Weinreb3, Linda M Zangwill3. 1. Hamilton Glaucoma Center, Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA; Centre for Eye Research Australia, Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Ophthalmology, Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: wu.z@unimelb.edu.au. 2. Duke Eye Center and Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 3. Hamilton Glaucoma Center, Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the performance of the pattern standard deviation (PSD) values derived from the central 12 locations of the 24-2 visual field test (C24-2) to the entire 10-2 test for detecting central visual field abnormalities in eyes with, suspected of having, or at risk of having glaucoma. DESIGN: Cross-sectional case-control study. METHODS: Eyes with, suspected of having, or at risk of having glaucoma, based on masked grading of optic disc stereophotographs and/or ocular hypertension (intraocular pressure ≥ 22 mm Hg) were included as cases (n = 523). Eyes from healthy participants were included as controls (n = 107) to allow the 2 tests to be compared at matched specificities. The sensitivity to detect cases at 95% specificity using PSD values derived from the entire 10-2 test and C24-2 were compared. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the 10-2 and C24-2 PSD values was not significantly different between the 10-2 and C24-2 at matched specificities (35.9% and 35.4% respectively; P = .900). There was also a substantial agreement between the cases detected by both methods (kappa = 0.80 ± 0.04), and a very strong association between the PSD values from the 2 methods (R2 = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: 10-2 and 24-2 tests identified a similar number of eyes with, suspected of having, or at risk of having glaucoma as having central visual field abnormalities using PSD values. These findings do not mean that 10-2 tests are not useful, but highlight the need for further studies to determine the potential advantages of 10-2 tests through equivalent comparisons against 24-2 tests to ensure appropriate recommendations are made about its incorporation into the glaucoma standard of care.
PURPOSE: To compare the performance of the pattern standard deviation (PSD) values derived from the central 12 locations of the 24-2 visual field test (C24-2) to the entire 10-2 test for detecting central visual field abnormalities in eyes with, suspected of having, or at risk of having glaucoma. DESIGN: Cross-sectional case-control study. METHODS: Eyes with, suspected of having, or at risk of having glaucoma, based on masked grading of optic disc stereophotographs and/or ocular hypertension (intraocular pressure ≥ 22 mm Hg) were included as cases (n = 523). Eyes from healthy participants were included as controls (n = 107) to allow the 2 tests to be compared at matched specificities. The sensitivity to detect cases at 95% specificity using PSD values derived from the entire 10-2 test and C24-2 were compared. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the 10-2 and C24-2 PSD values was not significantly different between the 10-2 and C24-2 at matched specificities (35.9% and 35.4% respectively; P = .900). There was also a substantial agreement between the cases detected by both methods (kappa = 0.80 ± 0.04), and a very strong association between the PSD values from the 2 methods (R2 = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: 10-2 and 24-2 tests identified a similar number of eyes with, suspected of having, or at risk of having glaucoma as having central visual field abnormalities using PSD values. These findings do not mean that 10-2 tests are not useful, but highlight the need for further studies to determine the potential advantages of 10-2 tests through equivalent comparisons against 24-2 tests to ensure appropriate recommendations are made about its incorporation into the glaucoma standard of care.
Authors: Zhichao Wu; Luke J Saunders; Fábio B Daga; Alberto Diniz-Filho; Felipe A Medeiros Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2017-03-06 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Michael H Goldbaum; Pamela A Sample; Kwokleung Chan; Julia Williams; Te-Won Lee; Eytan Blumenthal; Christopher A Girkin; Linda M Zangwill; Christopher Bowd; Terrence Sejnowski; Robert N Weinreb Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Felipe A Medeiros; Renato Lisboa; Linda M Zangwill; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Christopher A Girkin; Christopher Bowd; Robert N Weinreb Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2013-08-12 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Atalie C Thompson; Alessandro A Jammal; Samuel I Berchuck; Eduardo B Mariottoni; Zhichao Wu; Fabio B Daga; Nara G Ogata; Carla N Urata; Tais Estrela; Felipe A Medeiros Journal: Ophthalmol Glaucoma Date: 2020-06-14
Authors: Bruna Melchior; Ives A Valenzuela; C Gustavo De Moraes; Jayter S Paula; Massimo A Fazio; Christopher A Girkin; James Proudfoot; George A Cioffi; Robert N Weinreb; Linda M Zangwill; Jeffrey M Liebmann Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2022-02-13 Impact factor: 5.488
Authors: Giovanni Montesano; Luca M Rossetti; Davide Allegrini; Mario R Romano; David P Crabb Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2018-12-28 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Adi Orbach; Ghee Soon Ang; Andrew S Camp; Derek S Welsbie; Felipe A Medeiros; Christopher A Girkin; Massimo A Fazio; Won Hyuk Oh; Robert N Weinreb; Linda M Zangwill; Zhichao Wu Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2021-02-21 Impact factor: 5.488
Authors: Tutul Chakravarti; Mohamad Moghadam; James A Proudfoot; Robert N Weinreb; Christopher Bowd; Linda M Zangwill Journal: J Glaucoma Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 2.290
Authors: Donald C Hood; Abinaya A Thenappan; Emmanouil Tsamis; Jeffrey M Liebmann; C Gustavo De Moraes Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2020-08-07 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Eren Ekici; Sasan Moghimi; Huiyuan Hou; James Proudfoot; Linda M Zangwill; Jiun L Do; Won Hyuk Oh; Alireza Kamalipour; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Carlos Gustavo De Moraes; Christopher A Girkin; Nevin El-Nimri; Robert N Weinreb Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2020-10-29 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Ryan Caezar C David; Sasan Moghimi; Jiun L Do; Huiyuan Hou; James Proudfoot; Linda M Zangwill; Alireza Kamalipour; Takashi Nishida; Carlos Gustavo De Moraes; Christopher A Girkin; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Robert N Weinreb Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2021-06-06 Impact factor: 5.488