Literature DB >> 31555493

Comparison of Methods to Detect and Measure Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression.

Alessandro Rabiolo1,2, Esteban Morales1, Lilian Mohamed1,3, Vicente Capistrano1, Ji Hyun Kim1,4, Abdelmonem Afifi5, Fei Yu1,5, Anne L Coleman1, Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi1, Joseph Caprioli1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare methods to assess visual field (VF) progression in glaucoma.
METHODS: 4,950 VFs of 253 primary open angle-glaucoma patients were evaluated for progression with the following methods: clinical evaluation, guided progression analysis (GPA), mean deviation (MD), and visual field index (VFI) rates, Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS) and Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study (CIGTS) scores, pointwise linear regression (PLR), permutation of PLR (PoPLR), and glaucoma rate index (GRI). A separate simulated series of longitudinal VFs was assessed with all methods except for GPA and clinical evaluation.
RESULTS: The average (±SD) age of the patients at baseline was 65.4 (±11.5) years. The average (±SD) follow-up was 11.8 (±4.6) years, and the mean (±SD) number of VFs was 16.8 (±7.0). Proportion of series detected as progressing was 65% for PoPLR, 58% for GRI, 41% for GPA, 40% for PLR, 36% for CIGTS, 35% for clinicians, 31% for MD rate, 29% for AGIS, and 22% for VFI rate. Median times to detection of progression were 7.3 years for PoPLR, 7.5 years for GRI, 11 years for clinicians, 14 years for GPA, 16 years for PLR, 17 years for CIGTS, 19 years for AGIS, and more than 20 years for MD and VFI rates. In simulated VF series, GRI had the highest partial area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (0.040) to distinguish between glaucoma progression and aging/cataract decay, followed by VFI rate (0.028), MD rate (0.024), and PoPLR (0.006).
CONCLUSIONS: GRI and PoPLR showed the highest proportion of series detected as progressing and shortest times to progression detection. GRI exhibited the best ability to detect progression in the simulated VF series. TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE: Knowledge of the properties of every method would allow tailoring application in both clinical and research settings.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study; Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study; glaucoma rate index; guided progression analysis; mean deviation; perimetry; permutation of pointwise linear regression; visual field rate; visual field simulation

Year:  2019        PMID: 31555493      PMCID: PMC6748341          DOI: 10.1167/tvst.8.5.2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol        ISSN: 2164-2591            Impact factor:   3.283


  54 in total

1.  Truncated product method for combining P-values.

Authors:  D V Zaykin; Lev A Zhivotovsky; P H Westfall; B S Weir
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 2.135

2.  Examination of different pointwise linear regression methods for determining visual field progression.

Authors:  Stuart K Gardiner; David P Crabb
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 4.799

3.  The Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study: study design, methods, and baseline characteristics of enrolled patients.

Authors:  D C Musch; P R Lichter; K E Guire; C L Standardi
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 12.079

Review 4.  Identification of progressive glaucomatous visual field loss.

Authors:  Paul G D Spry; Chris A Johnson
Journal:  Surv Ophthalmol       Date:  2002 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 6.048

5.  Simulation of longitudinal threshold visual field data.

Authors:  P G Spry; A B Bates; C A Johnson; B C Chauhan
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 4.799

6.  Long-term follow-up of visual field progression after trabeculectomy in progressive normal-tension glaucoma.

Authors:  Takashi Shigeeda; Atsuo Tomidokoro; Makoto Araie; Nobuyuki Koseki; Seiichiro Yamamoto
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 12.079

7.  Comparison of different methods for detecting glaucomatous visual field progression.

Authors:  Eija Vesti; Chris A Johnson; Balwantray C Chauhan
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 4.799

8.  Interobserver agreement on visual field progression in glaucoma: a comparison of methods.

Authors:  A C Viswanathan; D P Crabb; A I McNaught; M C Westcott; D Kamal; D F Garway-Heath; F W Fitzke; R A Hitchings
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 4.638

9.  Measuring visual field progression in the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial.

Authors:  Anders Heijl; M Cristina Leske; Boel Bengtsson; Bo Bengtsson; Mohamed Hussein
Journal:  Acta Ophthalmol Scand       Date:  2003-06

10.  Intraocular pressure reduction in normal-tension glaucoma patients. The Normal Tension Glaucoma Study Group.

Authors:  M Schulzer
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 12.079

View more
  10 in total

1.  Multilayer Macula Vessel Density and Visual Field Progression in Glaucoma.

Authors:  Alireza Kamalipour; Sasan Moghimi; Huiyuan Hou; James A Proudfoot; Takashi Nishida; Linda M Zangwill; Robert N Weinreb
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-11-19       Impact factor: 5.488

2.  Longitudinal Macular Structure-Function Relationships in Glaucoma.

Authors:  Vahid Mohammadzadeh; Alessandro Rabiolo; Qiang Fu; Esteban Morales; Anne L Coleman; Simon K Law; Joseph Caprioli; Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2020-01-22       Impact factor: 12.079

3.  Pointwise Methods to Measure Long-term Visual Field Progression in Glaucoma.

Authors:  Diana Salazar; Esteban Morales; Alessandro Rabiolo; Vicente Capistrano; Mark Lin; Abdelmonem A Afifi; Fei Yu; Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi; Joseph Caprioli
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 7.389

4.  Impact of Intraocular Pressure Control on Rates of Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Loss in a Large Clinical Population.

Authors:  Alessandro A Jammal; Atalie C Thompson; Eduardo B Mariottoni; Tais Estrela; Leonardo S Shigueoka; Samuel I Berchuck; Felipe A Medeiros
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2020-06-21       Impact factor: 12.079

5.  Prediction of Visual Field Progression from OCT Structural Measures in Moderate to Advanced Glaucoma.

Authors:  Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi; Vahid Mohammadzadeh; Alessandro Rabiolo; Kiumars Edalati; Joseph Caprioli; Siamak Yousefi
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-01-30       Impact factor: 5.488

6.  Did the OCT Show Progression Since the Last Visit?

Authors:  Donald C Hood; Bruna Melchior; Emmanouil Tsamis; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Carlos G De Moraes
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 2.290

7.  Temporal contrast adaptation in the analysis of visual function in primary open-angle glaucoma.

Authors:  Qianru Wu; Minyue Xie; Xuhao Chen; Di Zhang; Xiaoyong Chen; Ke Xu; Ying Hong; Chun Zhang
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2022-03-16       Impact factor: 3.535

8.  Detection of Longitudinal Ganglion Cell/Inner Plexiform Layer Change: Comparison of Two Spectral-Domain Optical Coherence Tomography Devices.

Authors:  Golnoush Mahmoudinezhad; Vahid Mohammadzadeh; Navid Amini; Kevin Delao; Bingnan Zhou; Tae Hong; Sepideh Heydar Zadeh; Esteban Morales; Jack Martinyan; Simon K Law; Anne L Coleman; Joseph Caprioli; Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2021-06-05       Impact factor: 5.258

9.  Comparison of Rates of Progression of Macular OCT Measures in Glaucoma.

Authors:  Alessandro Rabiolo; Vahid Mohammadzadeh; Nima Fatehi; Esteban Morales; Anne L Coleman; Simon K Law; Joseph Caprioli; Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2020-06-30       Impact factor: 3.283

10.  Artificial Intelligence Algorithms to Diagnose Glaucoma and Detect Glaucoma Progression: Translation to Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Anna S Mursch-Edlmayr; Wai Siene Ng; Alberto Diniz-Filho; David C Sousa; Louis Arnold; Matthew B Schlenker; Karla Duenas-Angeles; Pearse A Keane; Jonathan G Crowston; Hari Jayaram
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2020-10-15       Impact factor: 3.283

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.