March 2012
Volume 53, Issue 14
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   March 2012
10-2 Versus 24-2 Visual Field Progression Analysis in Glaucomatous Eyes with Initial Parafoveal Scotomata
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Yungtai Kung
    New York Medical College, Valhalla, New York
  • Sung Chul Park
    Ophthalmology, Psychology,
    New York Medical College, Valhalla, New York
    Einhorn Clinical Research Center, New York Eye and Ear Infirmary, New York, New York
  • Joseph Simonson
    Einhorn Clinical Research Center, New York Eye and Ear Infirmary, New York, New York
  • Daniel Su
    Einhorn Clinical Research Center, New York Eye and Ear Infirmary, New York, New York
    Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, New York
  • Carlos Gustavo V. De Moraes
    Einhorn Clinical Research Center, New York Eye and Ear Infirmary, New York, New York
    Ophthalmology, NYU School of Medicine, New York, New York
  • Xian Zhang
    Ophthalmology, Psychology,
    Columbia University, New York, New York
  • Donald C. Hood
    Ophthalmology, Psychology,
    Ophthalmology,
    Columbia University, New York, New York
  • Jeffrey M. Liebmann
    Einhorn Clinical Research Center, New York Eye and Ear Infirmary, New York, New York
    Ophthalmology, NYU School of Medicine, New York, New York
  • Robert Ritch
    Ophthalmology, Psychology,
    New York Medical College, Valhalla, New York
    Einhorn Clinical Research Center, New York Eye and Ear Infirmary, New York, New York
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  Yungtai Kung, None; Sung Chul Park, None; Joseph Simonson, None; Daniel Su, None; Carlos Gustavo V. De Moraes, None; Xian Zhang, None; Donald C. Hood, None; Jeffrey M. Liebmann, Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc. (F, C); Robert Ritch, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  Supported by Moise Safra Research Fund of the New York Glaucoma Research Institute, New York, NY. Dr. Park is the Peter Crowley Research Scientist at the New York Eye and Ear Infirmary
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science March 2012, Vol.53, 202. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Yungtai Kung, Sung Chul Park, Joseph Simonson, Daniel Su, Carlos Gustavo V. De Moraes, Xian Zhang, Donald C. Hood, Jeffrey M. Liebmann, Robert Ritch; 10-2 Versus 24-2 Visual Field Progression Analysis in Glaucomatous Eyes with Initial Parafoveal Scotomata. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2012;53(14):202.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : To compare the efficacy of 10-2 vs. 24-2 visual fields (VFs) in detecting progression of initial parafoveal scotoma (IPFS) in glaucomatous eyes.

Methods: : Glaucoma patients with the following criteria were included: 1) an IPFS in either hemifield based on 2 reliable 24-2 SITA-Standard VFs (≥3 adjacent points with P<5% within the central 10 degrees of fixation, ≥1 point with P<1% lying at the innermost paracentral points, and no scotoma outside the central 10 degrees) and 2) five or more 10-2 and 24-2 VFs (initial 10-2 and 24-2 VFs obtained <6 months apart). Based on 10-2 and 24-2 full threshold map values, progression rates were calculated using pointwise linear regression (PLR) analysis and averaged to generate the global progression rate (dB/yr) of each eye. VF progression was defined as having ≥1 significantly progressing point(s) (slope <-1.0 dB/yr at P<0.01). The rates at these points were averaged to generate the localized progression rate (dB/yr) of each eye. The number of progressing eyes, localized progression rate, and number of progressing points were compared between 10-2 and 24-2 VFs within the central 10 degrees only.

Results: : Fifty eyes (50 patients) were included (mean age, 61.9±8.7 yr; 10-2 VF mean deviation [MD], -6.2 ± 3.4 dB; 24-2 VF MD, -3.4 ± 3.3 dB). Mean follow-up period (5.7 ± 2.1 vs. 5.6 ± 1.9 yr) and number of VFs (7.6 ± 2.4 vs. 7.8 ± 2.9) were similar for 10-2 and 24-2 tests (10-2 vs. 24-2, all P>0.3). Mean global progression rate was significantly greater in 10-2 analysis (-0.40±0.51 dB/yr) than in 24-2 analysis (-0.23 ± 0.28 dB/yr) (P=0.01). Within the central 10 degrees of VF, 10-2 analysis detected significantly more progressing eyes than 24-2 analysis (24 vs. 7 eyes; P<0.001). Within the central 10 degrees, mean localized progression rate (-1.3 vs. -0.4 dB/yr) and mean number of progressing points (2.5 vs. 0.5) were significantly greater in 10-2 than in 24-2 analyses (10-2 vs. 24-2; all P<0.001).

Conclusions: : In glaucoma patients with an IPFS, the 10-2 VF detects more progressing eyes than the 24-2 VF, suggesting that closer surveillance of the central VF using 10-2 VF is warranted in these eyes.

Keywords: perimetry • visual fields • 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.

×