Atsuya Miki1,2, Tomoyuki Okazaki1, Robert N Weinreb3, Misa Morota1, Aki Tanimura1, Rumi Kawashima1, Shinichi Usui1, Kenji Matsushita1, Kohji Nishida1,4. 1. Departments of Ophthalmology. 2. Innovative Visual Science, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine. 3. Shiley Eye Institute and Viterbi Family Department of Ophthalmology, Hamilton Glaucoma Center, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA. 4. Integrated Frontier Research for Medical Science Division, Institute for Open and Transdisciplinary Research Initiatives (OTRI), Osaka University, Osaka, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Trend analysis of visual field (VF) global indices may underestimate the rate of progression in severe glaucoma because of the influence of test points without detectable sensitivity. To test this hypothesis, we compared the rates of change of VF global indices with and without exclusion of undetectable points at various disease stages. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six hundred and forty-eight eyes of 366 glaucoma patients with 8 or more reliable 30-2 standard automated perimetry over more than 2 years were enrolled. We calculated targeted mean total deviation (TMTD) by averaging total deviation except points which were consistently undetectable in 3 baseline tests. Eyes were classified as early (≥-6 dB), moderate (-6 dB to -12 dB), advanced (-12 dB to -20 dB), and severe (<-20 dB) based on baseline mean deviation (MD). The rates of change of MD and TMTD in each stage were statistically compared. RESULTS: Mean age±SD at baseline was 56.9±11.9 years. The MD slope (-0.34 dB/y) in severe glaucoma was significantly slower than TMTD slope (-0.42 dB/y, P=0.028) and was slower than MD slopes in the other stages. Difference between MD slopes and TMTD slopes was most prominent in eyes with MD values less than -25 dB (P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Undetectable locations in eyes with severe glaucoma may underestimate the rates of VF progression. Trend analysis of TMTD rather than global indices offers a practical and simple approach for alleviating underestimation of VF progression in severe glaucoma.
PURPOSE: Trend analysis of visual field (VF) global indices may underestimate the rate of progression in severe glaucoma because of the influence of test points without detectable sensitivity. To test this hypothesis, we compared the rates of change of VF global indices with and without exclusion of undetectable points at various disease stages. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six hundred and forty-eight eyes of 366 glaucoma patients with 8 or more reliable 30-2 standard automated perimetry over more than 2 years were enrolled. We calculated targeted mean total deviation (TMTD) by averaging total deviation except points which were consistently undetectable in 3 baseline tests. Eyes were classified as early (≥-6 dB), moderate (-6 dB to -12 dB), advanced (-12 dB to -20 dB), and severe (<-20 dB) based on baseline mean deviation (MD). The rates of change of MD and TMTD in each stage were statistically compared. RESULTS: Mean age±SD at baseline was 56.9±11.9 years. The MD slope (-0.34 dB/y) in severe glaucoma was significantly slower than TMTD slope (-0.42 dB/y, P=0.028) and was slower than MD slopes in the other stages. Difference between MD slopes and TMTD slopes was most prominent in eyes with MD values less than -25 dB (P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Undetectable locations in eyes with severe glaucoma may underestimate the rates of VF progression. Trend analysis of TMTD rather than global indices offers a practical and simple approach for alleviating underestimation of VF progression in severe glaucoma.
Authors: Jun Mo Lee; Joseph Caprioli; Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi; Abdelmonem A Afifi; Esteban Morales; Meera Ramanathan; Fei Yu; Anne L Coleman Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2014-04-07 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Carlos Gustavo V De Moraes; Viral J Juthani; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Christopher C Teng; Celso Tello; Remo Susanna; Robert Ritch Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2011-05
Authors: Christopher Bowd; Linda M Zangwill; Robert N Weinreb; Felipe A Medeiros; Akram Belghith Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2016-11-30 Impact factor: 5.258