Nazareth Thaissa, Rocha Janaina, Scoralick Ana Luiza B, Dias Diego T, Gracitelli Carolina P B, Kanadani Fabio N, Prata Tiago S
Glaucoma Service, Instituto de Olhos Ciências Médicas, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Ophthalmology Department, Federal University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Clin Ophthalmol. 2020 Dec 2;14:4201-4207. doi: 10.2147/OPTH.S280692. eCollection 2020.
To compare global retinal sensitivity thresholds obtained through the Easyfield perimeter (EF) and Humphrey visual field analyzer (HFA).
Observational cross-sectional study.
Glaucomatous patients and glaucoma suspects enrolled between October 2018 and April 2019.
All participants underwent EF (SPARK Precision) and HFA perimetry (SITA-Standard). After inclusion, demographic and ocular data were collected, including measurements of retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness obtained from spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). Global indices (mean deviation, MD; pattern standard deviation, PSD) values were compared between perimeters, and their correlation and agreement were evaluated. We used regression analysis to investigate structure-functional correlations between SD-OCT measurements and MD index of each perimeter.
We investigated 111 eyes from 69 patients. Mean MD (mean difference=1.49dB) and PSD values (mean difference=0.42dB) from the HFA were significantly larger than those from the EF perimeter (p<0.001). There were significant linear correlations between EF-MD and HFA-MD (r=0.56), and EF-PSD and HFA-PSD (r=0.38; p<0.001). We found significant non-linear associations between average RNFL thickness and MD values derived from both EF (R=0.41) and HFA (R=0.17) perimeters (p≤0.012). A difference <2dB between EF-MD and HFA-MD was found in 53% of the eyes, while 71% of them had a difference <1dB between EF-PSD and HFA-PSD.
While we found a moderate correlation and a small mean sensitivity difference between test results, EF's correlation with structural measurements was at least comparable to that of the HFA. Our findings suggest that although these tests should not be used interchangeably, EF SPARK Precision could be used as an alternative for functional assessment in eyes with mild glaucoma.
比较通过简易视野计（EF）和 Humphrey 视野分析仪（HFA）获得的全视网膜敏感度阈值。
观察性横断面研究。
2018 年 10 月至 2019 年 4 月期间纳入的青光眼患者和青光眼疑似患者。
所有参与者均接受了 EF（SPARK Precision）和 HFA 视野检查（SITA-Standard）。纳入后，收集人口统计学和眼部数据，包括从光谱域光学相干断层扫描（SD-OCT）获得的视网膜神经纤维层（RNFL）厚度测量值。比较两种视野计的全局指标（平均偏差，MD；模式标准偏差，PSD）值，并评估它们的相关性和一致性。我们使用回归分析来研究 SD-OCT 测量值与每个视野计的 MD 指标之间的结构-功能相关性。
我们对 69 名患者的 111 只眼睛进行了研究。HFA 的平均 MD（平均差值 = 1.49dB）和 PSD 值（平均差值 = 0.42dB）显著大于 EF 视野计的相应值（p<0.001）。EF-MD 与 HFA-MD 之间存在显著的线性相关性（r = 0.56），EF-PSD 与 HFA-PSD 之间也存在显著的线性相关性（r = 0.38；p<0.001）。我们发现平均 RNFL 厚度与 EF（R = 0.41）和 HFA（R = 0.17）视野计得出的 MD 值之间存在显著的非线性关联（p≤0.012）。53%的眼睛 EF-MD 与 HFA-MD 的差值<2dB，而 71%的眼睛 EF-PSD 与 HFA-PSD 的差值<1dB。
虽然我们发现测试结果之间存在中等相关性和较小的平均敏感度差异，但 EF 与结构测量的相关性至少与 HFA 相当。我们的研究结果表明，尽管这些测试不应互换使用，但 EF SPARK Precision 可作为轻度青光眼患者功能评估的替代方法。
