advertisement
Abstract #82488 Published in IGR 20-4
Comparison of Methods to Detect and Measure Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression
Rabiolo A; Morales E; Mohamed L; Capistrano V; Kim JH; Afifi A; Yu F; Coleman AL; Nouri-Mahdavi K; Caprioli JTranslational vision science & technology 2019; 8: 2
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.
Full article
Classification:
6.20 Progression (Part of: 6 Clinical examination methods)
