Hamilton Glaucoma Center, Department of Ophthalmology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California.
Ophthalmology, Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Ophthalmol Glaucoma. 2019 Mar-Apr;2(2):95-102. doi: 10.1016/j.ogla.2019.01.003. Epub 2019 Jan 14.
To compare the ability of 10-2 visual field tests and central 12 locations of the 24-2 tests (C24-2) to detect central visual field progression in glaucoma eyes with early central visual field abnormalities.
Observational cohort study.
Three-hundred eyes of 180 participants with glaucoma or ocular hypertension.
Participants with both 10-2 and 24-2 tests performed on ≥3 visits over ≥1-year period were included to estimate the longitudinal variability of 10-2 and C24-2 visual field mean deviation (MD). The variability estimates were then used to reconstruct real-world visual field results by computer simulations, in a scenario where eyes had a baseline 10-2 and C24-2 MD was -2 dB and exhibited various rates of change (-0.25, -0.50, -0.75 and -1.00 dB/year), and the time to detect these changes were evaluated using trend-based analyses.
Time required to detect progression.
Overall, the time to detect central visual field progression was reduced by 7-9% using the 10-2 compared to C24-2 MD values, equivalent to a total reduction of 0.1-0.3 dB lost. For example, 90% of eyes with a central 10-2 or C24-2 MD loss of -0.50 dB/year would be detected after 5.0 and 5.5 years of semi-annual testing respectively, or after 3.4 and 3.7 years respectively for eyes with a -1.00 dB/year loss.
Trend-based analyses using 10-2 MD resulted in a mild reduction (7-9%) in the time to detect central visual field progression compared to C24-2 MD in glaucoma eyes with early central visual field abnormalities. Further studies are needed to determine whether other progression analyses can better exploit the increased sampling of 10-2 tests. These findings provide evidence-based guidance on the potential value-add of 10-2 testing in the clinical management of glaucoma patients.
比较 10-2 视野测试和中央 12 个位置的 24-2 测试(C24-2)在检测早期中央视野异常的青光眼眼中中央视野进展的能力。
观察性队列研究。
180 名参与者的 300 只眼睛患有青光眼或高眼压症。
纳入了在≥1 年期间进行了≥3 次 10-2 和 24-2 测试的参与者,以估计 10-2 和 C24-2 视野平均偏差(MD)的纵向变异性。然后,使用计算机模拟重建真实世界的视野结果,假设眼睛的基线 10-2 和 C24-2 MD 为-2 dB,并显示出各种变化率(-0.25、-0.50、-0.75 和-1.00 dB/年),并使用基于趋势的分析评估检测这些变化的时间。
检测进展所需的时间。
总体而言,与 C24-2 MD 值相比,使用 10-2 视野 MD 值可将中央视野进展的检测时间缩短 7-9%,相当于总共减少 0.1-0.3 dB 的损失。例如,90%的中央 10-2 或 C24-2 MD 每年损失 0.50 dB/年的眼睛,分别在 5.0 和 5.5 年的半年度测试后和每年损失 1.00 dB/年的眼睛分别在 3.4 和 3.7 年后会被检测到。
使用 10-2 MD 进行基于趋势的分析与使用 C24-2 MD 相比,在患有早期中央视野异常的青光眼眼中,检测中央视野进展的时间略有缩短(7-9%)。需要进一步的研究来确定其他进展分析是否可以更好地利用 10-2 测试的增加采样。这些发现为 10-2 测试在青光眼患者临床管理中的潜在增值提供了循证指导。