scholarly journals Classification and Statistical Trend Analysis in Detecting Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Cristiana Valente ◽  
Elisa D’Alessandro ◽  
Michele Iester
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Analysis ◽  
Standard Deviation ◽  
Visual Field ◽  
Trend Analysis ◽  
Open Angle Glaucoma ◽  
Mean Deviation ◽  
Threshold Strategy ◽  
Visual Field Progression ◽  
The Mean

Aim. To evaluate the agreement between different methods in detection of glaucomatous visual field progression using two classification-based methods and four statistical approaches based on trend analysis. Methods. This is a retrospective and longitudinal study. Twenty Caucasian patients (mean age 73.8 ± 13.43 years) with open-angle glaucoma were recruited in the study. Each visual field was assessed by Humphrey Field Analyzer, program SITA standard 30-2 or 24-2 (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., Dublin, CA). Full threshold strategy was also accepted for baseline tests. Progression was analyzed by using Hodapp–Parrish–Anderson classification and the Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study visual field defect score. For the statistical analysis, linear regression (r2) was calculated for mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD), and visual field index (VFI), and when it was significant, each series of visual field was considered progressive. We also used Progressor to look for a significant progression of each visual field series. The agreement between methods, based on statistical analysis and classification, was evaluated using a weighted kappa statistic. Results. Thirty-eight visual field series were analyzed. The mean follow-up time was 6.2 ± 1.53 years (mean ± standard deviation). At baseline, the mean MD was −7.34 ± 7.18 dB; at the end of the follow-up, the mean MD was −9.25 ± 8.65 dB; this difference was statistically significant (p<0.001). The agreement to detect progression was fair between all methods based on statistical analysis and classification except for PSD r2. A substantial agreement (κ = 0.698 ± 0.126) was found between MD r2 and VFI r2. With the use of all the statistical analysis, there was a better time-saving. Conclusions. The best agreement to detect progression was found between MD r2 and VFI r2. VFI r2 showed the best agreement with all the other methods. GPA2 can help ophthalmologists to detect glaucoma progression and to help in treatment decisions. PSD r2 was the worse method to detect progression.

scholarly journals Long Term Results of Visual Field Progression Analysis in Open Angle Glaucoma Patients Under Treatment

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 116-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tolga Kocatürk ◽  
Sinan Bekmez ◽  
Merve Katrancı ◽  
Harun Çakmak ◽  
Volkan Dayanır
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Open Angle Glaucoma ◽  
Long Term Results ◽  
Mean Deviation ◽  
Event Analysis ◽  
Open Angle ◽  
Visual Field Progression ◽  
Department Of Ophthalmology

Purpose : To evaluate visual field progression with trend and event analysis in open angle glaucoma patients under treatment. Materials and Methods : Fifteen year follow-up results of 408 eyes of 217 glaucoma patients who were followed at Adnan Menderes University, Department of Ophthalmology between 1998 and 2013 were analyzed retrospectively. Visual field data were collected for Mean Deviation (MD), Visual Field Index (VFI), and event occurrence. Results : There were 146 primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG), 123 pseudoexfoliative glaucoma (XFG) and 139 normal tension glaucoma (NTG) eyes. MD showed significant change in all diagnostic groups (p<0.001). The difference of VFI between first and last examinations were significantly different in POAG (p<0.001), and XFG (p<0.003) but not in NTG. VFI progression rates were -0.3, -0.43, and -0.2 % loss/year in treated POAG, XFG, and NTG, respectively. The number of empty triangles were statistically different between POAG-NTG (p=0.001), and XFG-NTG (p=0.002) groups. The number of half-filled (p=0.002), and full-filled (p=0.010) triangles were significantly different between XFG-NTG groups. Conclusion : Functional long-term follow-up of glaucoma patients can be monitored with visual field indices. We herein report our fifteen year follow-up results in open angle glaucoma.

Relationship between mean follow-up intraocular pressure, rates of visual field progression and current target intraocular pressure guidelines

2020 ◽  
pp. bjophthalmol-2020-317406
Author(s):  
Bruna Melchior ◽  
Carlos Gustavo De Moraes ◽  
Jayter S Paula ◽  
George A Cioffi ◽  
Christopher A Girkin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intraocular Pressure ◽  
Visual Field ◽  
Treatment Guidelines ◽  
Evaluation Study ◽  
Mean Deviation ◽  
Racial Groups ◽  
Current Guideline ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
The Mean

AimsTo investigate if eyes presenting intraocular pressure (IOP) within the limits of current guideline-driven target IOP indeed experience slow rates of glaucomatous visual field (VF) progression.MethodsA total of 8598 24-2 VF tests from 603 eyes from the African Descent and Glaucoma Evaluation Study with manifest glaucoma were included. The sample was split into three groups based on baseline VF mean deviation (MD): G1 (better than −5.0 dB), G2 (−5.0 to −10 dB) and G3 (worse than −10 dB). We investigated the relationship between existing target IOP guidelines and rates of MD progression in these groups.ResultsFor stable eyes, the medians and IQR of the mean follow-up IOP were G1=15.0 mmHg (IQR: 13.1 to 17.7), G2=13.2 mmHg (IQR: 11.6 to 14.3) and G3=11.9 mmHg (IQR: 10.1 to 13.8) (p<0.01). When considering the mean follow-up IOP within the limits proposed by current guidelines, the median MD slopes were: −0.20 dB/y (IQR: −0.43 to −0.02) for G1<21 mmHg, −0.19 dB/y (IQR: −0.51 to −0.01) for G2<18 mmHg and −0.15 dB/y (IQR: −0.47 to 0.05) for G3<15 mmHg (p=0.63). There were no significant differences between racial groups.ConclusionIn a sample of patients with manifest glaucoma, despite substantial variability between eyes, adherence to treatment guidelines helped slow the rates of global VF progression at various stages of disease.Trial registration numberclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00221923.

Validating the usefulness of sectorwise regression of visual field in the central 10°

2021 ◽  
pp. bjophthalmol-2020-317391
Author(s):  
Takashi Omoto ◽  
Hiroshi Murata ◽  
Yuri Fujino ◽  
Masato Matsuura ◽  
Takehiro Yamashita ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Mean Absolute Error ◽  
Open Angle Glaucoma ◽  
Absolute Error ◽  
Open Angle ◽  
Clustering Method ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Test Points

AimTo evaluate the usefulness of the application of the clustering method to the trend analysis (sectorwise regression) in comparison with the pointwise linear regression (PLR).MethodsThis study included 153 eyes of 101 patients with open-angle glaucoma. With PLR, the total deviation (TD) values of the 10th visual field (VF) were predicted using the shorter VF sequences (from first 3 to 9) by extrapolating TD values against time in a pointwise manner. Then, 68 test points were stratified into 29 sectors. In each sector, the mean of TD values was calculated and allocated to all test points belonging to the sector. Subsequently, the TD values of the 10th VF were predicted by extrapolating the allocated TD value against time in a pointwise manner. Similar analyses were conducted to predict the 11th–16th VFs using the first 10 VFs.ResultsWhen predicting the 10th VF using the shorter sequences, the mean absolute error (MAE) values were significantly smaller in the sectorwise regression than in PLR. When predicting from the 11th and 16th VFs using the first 10 VFs, the MAE values were significantly larger in the sectorwise regression than in PLR when predicting the 11th VF; however, no significant difference was observed with other VF predictions.ConclusionAccurate prediction was achieved using the sectorwise regression, in particular when a small number of VFs were used in the prediction. The accuracy of the sectorwise regression was not hampered in longer follow-up compared with PLR.

Role of Central Corneal Thickness on Baseline Parameters and Progression of Visual Fields in Open Angle Glaucoma

2007 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 545-549 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Shah ◽  
C. Kniestedt ◽  
A. Bostrom ◽  
R. Stamper ◽  
S. Lin
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Central Corneal Thickness ◽  
Open Angle Glaucoma ◽  
Corneal Thickness ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Negative Relationship ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Mean Deviation ◽  
Open Angle ◽  
Visual Field Progression

Purpose To evaluate the relationship of central corneal thickness (CCT) to baseline visual field parameters and visual field progression in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG). Methods Charts of consecutive patients with POAG were reviewed to obtain visual field data. Visual field was measured by standard threshold static perimetry. Variables analyzed included mean deviation (MD) and pattern standard deviation (PSD). Results A total of 121 eyes examined over 4 years were evaluated. A significant negative relationship between CCT and PSD (correlation coefficient: −0.02, p<0.05) was found. Analyses comparing CCT to change in PSD and MD (visual field progression) were statistically not significant. Conclusions Patients with thinner corneas initially present with a greater visual field defect, indicating that thin corneas may contribute to advanced glaucomatous damage at the time of diagnosis. However, CCT does not seem to be a significant risk factor for progression of the disease.

Investigating the usefulness of a cluster-based trend analysis to detect visual field progression in patients with open-angle glaucoma

2017 ◽  
Vol 101 (12) ◽  
pp. 1658-1665 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuichiro Aoki ◽  
Hiroshi Murata ◽  
Yuri Fujino ◽  
Masato Matsuura ◽  
Atsuya Miki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Trend Analysis ◽  
Open Angle Glaucoma ◽  
Open Angle ◽  
Visual Field Progression

scholarly journals Comparison of visual field progression in new-diagnosed primary open-angle and exfoliation glaucoma patients in Sweden.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcelo Ayala
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Primary Open Angle Glaucoma ◽  
Open Angle Glaucoma ◽  
T Test ◽  
Open Angle ◽  
Visual Field Progression ◽  
Exfoliation Glaucoma ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Glaucoma Group

Abstract Background: The present study aimed to compare visual field progression in new-diagnosed exfoliation versus open-angle glaucoma patients. Methods: Retrospective study. The study included patients with new-diagnosed primary open-angle and exfoliation glaucoma. All patients were followed for three years with reliable visual fields. At least five reliable fields were needed for inclusion. Exfoliation and open-angle glaucoma were defined based on the European Glaucoma Society guidelines. Visual field evaluation was performed using the software threshold 24-2 of the Humphrey Field Analysis. Outcomes: Visual field progression. For visual field progression, three different strategies were used: mean deviation (MD), visual field index (VFI), and the guided progression analysis (GPA). Results: The study included 128 subjects, of the 54 in the open-angle and 74 in the exfoliation glaucoma group. The MD difference values were higher in the exfoliation (-3.17 dB) than in the primary open-angle (-1.25 dB) glaucoma group in the three-year follow-up period. The difference between groups was significant (t-test, p=<0.001). The difference in VFI was calculated for the three years follow-up period. The difference was higher in the exfoliation (-7.65%) than in the primary open (-1.90%) glaucoma group (t-test, p=<0.001). The GPA showed progression in 58% of cases in exfoliation, and 13% in primary open glaucoma group (Chi-square, p=<0.001). Conclusion: The present study found a more frequent and faster visual field progression in exfoliation than in primary open-angle glaucoma patients. New-diagnosed exfoliation glaucoma patients must be controlled and treated more strictly than primary open-angle glaucoma patients to avoid visual field deterioration.

scholarly journals Comparison of Perimetric Outcomes from Melbourne Rapid Fields Tablet Perimeter Software and Humphrey Field Analyzer in Glaucoma Patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Harsh Kumar ◽  
Mithun Thulasidas
Keyword(s):  
Standard Deviation ◽  
Visual Field ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Visual Fields ◽  
Test Time ◽  
Mean Deviation ◽  
Time Saving ◽  
Humphrey Field Analyzer ◽  
Probability Plot ◽  
The Mean

Purpose. To compare visual field results obtained using Melbourne Rapid Fields (MRF) iPad-based perimeter software and Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) 24-2 Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) standard program in glaucoma patients. Design. A cross-sectional observational study. Methods. In this single-centre study involving patients diagnosed with glaucoma, the perimetric outcomes of MRF were compared against those returned from the HFA 24-2 SITA standard. Outcomes included mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD), visual field index (VFI)/visual capacity (VC), foveal threshold, test time, number of points depressed at P<5% on PSD probability plot, and glaucoma hemifield test/color coded indicator. Results. The study included 28 eyes of 28 glaucoma patients. Mean (standard deviation) test times were 342.07 (56.70) seconds for MRF and 375.11 (88.95) for HFA 24-2 SITA standard P=0.046. Mean MD was significantly lower for MRF (Δ = 3.09, P<0.001), and mean PSD was significantly higher for MRF (Δ = 1.40, P=0.005) compared with HFA. The mean foveal threshold for the MRF was significantly lower than the mean HFA foveal threshold ((Δ = 9.25, P<0.001). The number of points depressed at P<5% on the PSD probability plot was significantly less for MRF P<0.001. Other perimetric outcomes showed no significant differences between both. Bland–Altman plots showed that considerable variability existed between the programs. Conclusion. MRF is a good cost-effective, time-saving, user-friendly tool for monitoring visual fields in settings where access to traditional perimetry is limited. The lack of Internet strength in rural areas and questionable detection of early cases may be two points in MRF fields requiring an upgrade.

scholarly journals The Effect of Contact Lens–spectacle Reversed Galilean Telescope on the Visual Field of Patients with Open-angle Glaucoma

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammadreza Moniritilaki ◽  
Maryam Badakhsh ◽  
Asieh Ehsaei ◽  
Ramin Daneshvar
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Contact Lens ◽  
Open Angle Glaucoma ◽  
Field Measurements ◽  
Visual Field Defects ◽  
Mean Deviation ◽  
Open Angle ◽  
A Value ◽  
Before And After ◽  
The Mean

Purpose: Glaucoma causes irreversible visual field defects. This study aims to evaluate the effect of a reversed Galilean telescope on the visual field of patients with open-angle glaucoma. Methods: Fifty-two glaucoma patients with a restricted visual field were recruited for this study. Central 30° visual field measurements were performed using a Humphrey visual field analyzer before and after applying the reversed Galilean telescope. To be more cosmetically acceptable, a combination of contact lens–spectacle was used as the reversed Galilean telescope. Results: Our data analysis showed that the reversed Galilean telescope had a significant effect on all measured perimetric indices. Visual field index (VFI) improved from a basic value of 44.38 ± 26.96 percent to 49.30 ± 29.83 percent by using the reversed telescope (P < 0.001). Moreover, the mean deviation (MD) was significantly improved from the initial value of –19.91 ± 7.19 dB to a value of –18.69 ± 7.73 dB (P < 0.001). However, our results showed a significant reduction in the pattern standard deviation (PSD) comparing before (9.83 ± 2.82) and after (8.51 ± 3.30) values using the reversed Galilean telescope (P < 0.001). Conclusion: The contact lens–spectacle combination reversed Galilean telescope significantly improved the central 30° visual field of glaucoma patients with the restricted visual field.

Achieving low target intraocular pressures in severe glaucoma

2020 ◽  
pp. 112067212097990
Author(s):  
Gazella Bruce Warjri ◽  
Talvir Sidhu ◽  
Azmira Kishan ◽  
Aswini Kumar Behera ◽  
Jyoti Shakrawal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Angle Glaucoma ◽  
Angle Closure ◽  
Mean Deviation ◽  
Age Group ◽  
Open Angle ◽  
Primary Angle Closure ◽  
Primary Angle Closure Glaucoma ◽  
Humphrey Field Analyzer ◽  
The Mean

Purpose: This study aimed to assess details of therapy required to achieve an intraocular pressure (IOP) of ⩽12 mmHg in patients with severe glaucoma of different etiologies. Methods: Patients with a follow-up of at least 1 year, who fulfilled inclusion criteria were selected, and data analyzed with respect to baseline IOP, number of medications, and/or surgeries required to achieve an IOP of ⩽12 mmHg and ⩾6 mmHg. Final IOP, visual field status and medications/surgery required were noted. Results: About 127 eyes of 85 patients met all criteria. There were 48 eyes having primary angle closure glaucoma (PACG), 16 eyes with primary open angle glaucoma (POAG), 17 eyes of juvenile open angle glaucoma (JOAG), and 46 eyes of secondary glaucoma. The mean baseline IOP was 33.14 ± 11.07 mmHg and final IOP 10.25 ± 1.81 mmHg. In the age group >40 years, 29.63% of patients were controlled on medication as compared to 9.09% and 5.71% in the age group of <20 years and 20–40 years ( p = 0.007). With a baseline IOP of <25 mmHg, 48.65% required a trabeculectomy, whereas for 25–30, and >30 mmHg, 62.5% and 97.29% respectively, required surgery ( p < 0.001).66.67% of patients having mean deviation of −12 to −16 dB (decibels) on Humphrey field analyzer (HFA) underwent surgery to achieve target IOP in comparison to 83.52% who had mean deviation greater than −16 dB ( p = 0.036). Conclusion: Only 21.26% of severe glaucoma eyes could be controlled on medications alone. A baseline IOP of >25 mmHg, age <40 years and mean deviation worse than −16 dB, had a higher frequency of trabeculectomies to achieve an IOP of ⩽12 mmHg.

scholarly journals Comparison of visual field progression in new-diagnosed primary open-angle and exfoliation glaucoma patients in Sweden

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcelo Ayala
Keyword(s):  
Visual Field ◽  
Primary Open Angle Glaucoma ◽  
Open Angle Glaucoma ◽  
T Test ◽  
Open Angle ◽  
Visual Field Progression ◽  
Exfoliation Glaucoma ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Glaucoma Group

Abstract Background The present study aimed to compare visual field progression in new-diagnosed exfoliation versus open-angle glaucoma patients. Methods Retrospective study. The study included patients with new-diagnosed primary open-angle and exfoliation glaucoma. All patients were followed for 3 years with reliable visual fields. At least five reliable fields were needed for inclusion. Exfoliation and open-angle glaucoma were defined based on the European Glaucoma Society guidelines. Visual field evaluation was performed using the software threshold 24–2 of the Humphrey Field Analysis. Outcomes: Visual field progression. For visual field progression, three different strategies were used: mean deviation (MD), visual field index (VFI), and the guided progression analysis (GPA). Results The study included 128 subjects, of the 54 in the open-angle and 74 in the exfoliation glaucoma group. The MD difference values were higher in the exfoliation (− 3.17 dB) than in the primary open-angle (− 1.25 dB) glaucoma group in the three-year follow-up period. The difference between groups was significant (t-test, p = < 0.001). The difference in VFI was calculated for the 3 years follow-up period. The difference was higher in the exfoliation (− 7.65%) than in the primary open (− 1.90%) glaucoma group (t-test, p = < 0.001). The GPA showed progression in 58% of cases in exfoliation, and 13% in primary open glaucoma group (Chi-square, p = < 0.001). Conclusion The present study found a more frequent and faster visual field progression in exfoliation than in primary open-angle glaucoma patients. New-diagnosed exfoliation glaucoma patients must be controlled and treated more strictly than primary open-angle glaucoma patients to avoid visual field deterioration.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document