June 2013
Volume 54, Issue 15
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2013
Cluster-Based Trend Analysis of Visual Field Progression in Low Tension and High Tension Open-Angle Glaucoma
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Iman Goharian
    Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, Palm Beach Gardens, FL
  • David Greenfield
    Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, Palm Beach Gardens, FL
  • Mitra Sehi
    Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, Palm Beach Gardens, FL
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships Iman Goharian, None; David Greenfield, National Eye Institute (R), Carl Zeiss Meditec (R), Optovue (R), Heidelberg Engineering (R), Allergan (C), Alcon (C), Merz (C), Quark (C), SOLX (C), Biometric Imaging (C), Senju (C); Mitra Sehi, Allergan, Inc. (C)
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2013, Vol.54, 3934. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Iman Goharian, David Greenfield, Mitra Sehi; Cluster-Based Trend Analysis of Visual Field Progression in Low Tension and High Tension Open-Angle Glaucoma. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2013;54(15):3934.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

To investigate cluster-based characteristics of visual field progression in low tension glaucoma (LTG) and high tension open-angle glaucoma (HTG) using 2 trend-based analysis methods.


Records of glaucoma patients with ≥30 months of follow-up and ≥6 standard automated perimetry (SAP) tests were reviewed. Inclusion required age ≥40 years, visual acuity ≥20/40 and reliable SAP. LTG was defined as untreated IOP ≤21mmHg, no history of IOP >21mmHg, open iridocorneal angles, reproducible glaucomatous SAP abnormality and corresponding optic nerve damage. The 2 groups were matched for age, follow-up time and baseline MD. SAP test locations were grouped into 10 clusters based on the topographic distribution of the RNFL. Progression was determined using: A) Corrected Cluster Trend Analysis (CCTA; EyeSuite, Haag-Streit, Switzerland), defined as progression rate (dB/yr) in mean pattern deviation (PD) values of each cluster at p<0.01; B) Pointwise Linear Regression Analysis (PLR; ProgressorTM, UK) defined as pointwise progression rate at p<0.01 in ≥1 location in each cluster. Random effect models, ANOVA, and regression analyses were performed.


70 eyes (35 LTG, 35 HTG) were enrolled. Patients with LTG and HTG had similar age (71.5±8.9; 72.0±9.0yrs; p=0.79), follow-up time (60.9±22.4; 64.3±29.2mos; p=0.58), treated IOP (14.4±2.9; 14.6±3.9mmHg; p=0.78), baseline MD ( 4.5±4.0; -4.4±4.0dB; p=0.91), and rate of loss in MD ( 0.33±0.57; -0.15±0.72 dB/yr; p=0.27). The rate of loss in square root of loss variance (sLV) was worse in LTG (0.27±0.38dB; p=0.01) vs HTG (0.03±0.39dB). More LTG eyes were classified as progressors compared with HTG eyes using CCTA (26 vs 17; p=0.048) and PLR (27 vs 16;p=0.01). The number of progressing LTG eyes in inferior arcuate cluster was higher than the number of progressing HTG eyes (12 vs 4; p=0.03) but was similar (p>0.05) in all other clusters using CCTA. The cluster-based rates of loss were steeper in LTG in inferior arcuate ( 0.17±0.43dB/yr; p=0.03) and inferior paracentral clusters ( 0.33±0.62dB/yr; p=0.02) vs HTG ( 0.01±0.28 and -0.04±0.67dB/yr) using CCTA. Both methods agreed on 25 LTG and 16 HTG progressors, and 2 LTG and 0 HTG non-progressors (kappa=0.40;p=0.01).


Paracentral and arcuate clusters progress faster and more frequently in LTG compared with HTG and should be monitored more closely.

Keywords: 758 visual fields  

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.