March 2012
Volume 53, Issue 14
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   March 2012
Comparison of Visual Field Progression Between Mean Deviation, Visual Field Index, GPA, CIGTS and AGIS Indices in Patients with Primary Open Angle Glaucoma
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Fei Yu
    Ophthalmology, UCLA Jules Stein Eye Institute, Los Angeles, California
  • Nariman Nassiri
    Division of Glaucoma, Jules Stein Eye Institute/UCLA, Los Angeles, California
  • Naveed Nilforushan
    Ophthalmology, UCLA, Jules-Stein Eye Institiute, Los Angeles, California
  • Sasan Moghimi
    Ophthalmology,
    Jules Stein Eye Institute, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
  • Dennis Mock
    Ophthalmology, UCLA Jules Stein Eye Institute, Los Angeles, California
  • Shane Knipping
    Ophthalmology, UCLA Jules Stein Eye Institute, Los Angeles, California
  • Simon K. Law
    Ophthalmology, CHS/UCLA, Los Angeles, California
  • Joseph Caprioli
    Glaucoma,
    Jules Stein Eye Institute, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
  • Anne L. Coleman
    Ophthalmology,
    Jules Stein Eye Institute, UCLA, Los Angeles, California
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  Fei Yu, None; Nariman Nassiri, None; Naveed Nilforushan, None; Sasan Moghimi, None; Dennis Mock, None; Shane Knipping, None; Simon K. Law, None; Joseph Caprioli, Alcon, Allergen (F, C); Anne L. Coleman, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science March 2012, Vol.53, 193. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Fei Yu, Nariman Nassiri, Naveed Nilforushan, Sasan Moghimi, Dennis Mock, Shane Knipping, Simon K. Law, Joseph Caprioli, Anne L. Coleman; Comparison of Visual Field Progression Between Mean Deviation, Visual Field Index, GPA, CIGTS and AGIS Indices in Patients with Primary Open Angle Glaucoma. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2012;53(14):193.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : To estimate the level of agreement between mean deviation (MD), visual field index (VFI), guided progression analysis (GPA), Advanced Glaucoma Intervention (AGIS), and the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study (CIGTS) in evaluating global rate of progression of functional damage of glaucomatous neuropathy.

Methods: : In this retrospective longitudinal study, 157 eyes (127 patients) with primary open angle glaucoma (mean (±SD) age of 69.1± 10.5 years) from the clinical glaucoma database of the Jules Stein Eye Institute were included. The inclusion criteria were age more than 30 years old; baseline best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) better than 20/80; more than 5 years follow-up and availability of 7 or more reliable visual field exams. Reliability of visual field exams were defined as fixation loss <25%, false positive and negative < 15%. Global progression for MD, VFI, CIGTS and AGIS including all exams were calculated with linear regression analysis. Progression with MD, VFI, CIGTS and AGIS was considered as statistically significant worsening slopes at P value < 0.05, and with GPA was defined as the first time that "likely progression" was flagged. The level of agreement in VF progression among indices was assessed using kappa statistics.

Results: : The average (± SD) number of VFs and follow-up time were 10.4 (± 2.6) and 8.5 (± 2.5) years, respectively. The number of eyes showing progression with GPA, MD, VFI, CIGTS, AGIS was 60 (38.2%), 63 (40.1%), 77 (49.0%), 53 (33.8%) and 40 (25.5%), respectively. The agreement of GPA with MD, VFI, CIGTS and AGIS was 0.40, 0.42, 0.24 and 0.21, respectively. The agreement of MD vs. VFI, MD vs. CIGTS, MD vs. AGIS, VFI vs. CIGTS, VFI vs. AGIS and CIGTS vs. AGIS was 0.54, 0.51, 0.42, 0.49, 0.37 and 0.32, respectively. Only 15 eyes showed progression with all indices.

Conclusions: : We found that there was a mild to moderate agreement among different indices of visual field progression. This makes comparison of studies using different indices difficult and points to the need for consensus on visual field progression.

Keywords: visual fields • optic nerve • detection 
×
×

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.

×