Comparison of Methods to Detect and Measure Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression

被引:48
|
作者
Rabiolo, Alessandro [1 ,2 ]
Morales, Esteban [1 ]
Mohamed, Lilian [1 ,3 ]
Capistrano, Vicente [1 ]
Kim, Ji Hyun [1 ,4 ]
Afifi, Abdelmonem [5 ]
Yu, Fei [1 ,5 ]
Coleman, Anne L. [1 ]
Nouri-Mandavi, Kouros [1 ]
Caprioli, Joseph [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Los Angeles, David Geffen Sch Med, Stein Eye Inst, Los Angeles, CA 90095 USA
[2] Univ Vita Salute, Dept Ophthalmol, IRCCS San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
[3] Cairo Univ, Dept Ophthalmol, Fac Med, Cairo, Egypt
[4] Siloam Eye Hosp, Seoul, South Korea
[5] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Fielding Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Biostat, Los Angeles, CA USA
来源
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study; Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study; glaucoma rate index; guided progression analysis; mean deviation; permutation of pointwise linear regression; perimetry; visual field rate; visual field simulation; STANDARD AUTOMATED PERIMETRY; REGRESSION; THRESHOLD; AGREEMENT; RATES; DECAY; SPECIFICITY; SENSITIVITY; FREQUENCY; TRIALS;
D O I
10.1167/tvst.8.5.2
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of methods to detect glaucomatous visual field progression.
    Hoffman, DC
    Westcott, M
    Gaasterland, D
    Caprioli, J
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2001, 42 (04) : S152 - S152
  • [2] Comparison of methods for detecting glaucomatous visual field progression
    Chauhan, BC
    Vesti, E
    Johnson, CA
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2002, 43 : U488 - U488
  • [3] Comparison of different methods for detecting glaucomatous visual field progression
    Vesti, E
    Johnson, CA
    Chauhan, BC
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2003, 44 (09) : 3873 - 3879
  • [4] Comparison of different methods for detecting glaucomatous visual field progression
    Vesti, E
    Chauhan, BC
    Johnson, CA
    PERIMETRY UPDATE 2002/2003, 2004, : 39 - 40
  • [5] Comparison of methods to detect visual field progression in glaucoma
    NouriMahdavi, K
    Brigatti, L
    Weitzman, M
    Caprioli, J
    OPHTHALMOLOGY, 1997, 104 (08) : 1228 - 1236
  • [6] Agreement to detect glaucomatous visual field progression by using three different methods: a multicentre study
    Iester, M.
    Capris, E.
    De Feo, F.
    Polvicino, M.
    Brusini, P.
    Capris, P.
    Corallo, G.
    Figus, M.
    Fogagnolo, P.
    Frezzotti, P.
    Manni, G.
    Perdicchi, A.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2011, 95 (09) : 1276 - 1283
  • [7] Evaluation of methods for determining glaucomatous visual field progression
    Sehi, M
    Hutchings, N
    Buys, YM
    Flanagan, JG
    PERIMETRY UPDATE 2000/2001, 2001, : 351 - 355
  • [8] Comparison of three psychophysical tests for detecting glaucomatous visual field progression
    Varma, DK
    Artes, PH
    Nicolela, MT
    LeBlanc, RP
    Chauhan, BC
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2003, 44 : U3 - U3
  • [9] Comparison of methods to detect visual field progression in glaucoma (vol 104, pg 1228, 1997)
    Nouri-Mahdavi
    Brigatti
    Weitzman
    Caprioli, J
    OPHTHALMOLOGY, 1998, 105 (01) : 7 - 7
  • [10] Oral Statins and Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression
    Su, Wei-Wen
    Yeh, Po-Han
    Shie, Shian-Sen
    Cheng, Yu-Chun
    Lee, Yung-Sung
    Shen, Su-Chin
    Chen, Henry Shen-Lih
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERONTOLOGY, 2023, 17 (01) : 54 - 58