Optic disc and visual field progression in ocular hypertensive subjects: detection rates, specificity, and agreement.

PURPOSE To examine the detection rates, specificity, and agreement between visual field (VF) progression and Heidelberg Retina Tomograph (HRT; Heidelberg Engineering, GmbH, Heidelberg, Germany) rim area (RA) progression in subjects with ocular hypertension (OHT). METHODS One hundred ninety-eight OHT and 21 control subjects were examined prospectively (1994-2001) with regular Humphrey VF (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., Dublin, CA) and HRT testing. Point-wise linear regression (PLR) of sensitivity/time was used to assess VF progression, using standard and three-omitting (less stringent and stringent) criteria. The change in HRT-detected progression was assessed by linear regression of sectoral RA/time, defined as slope>1%/year, with significance level tailored according to series variability. Less stringent and stringent criteria were tested. Specificity was estimated by the proportions of control subjects with disease progression and significantly improving subjects (all). Agreement between disc and field progression in the subjects with OHT was assessed with specificities matched for both VF and HRT. RESULTS Specificity for VF PLR was estimated to be 85.7% to 95.4% when standard criteria were used, and for RA/time to be 88.1% to 90.5% with the less-stringent criteria. In this comparison, 21.2% progressed by RA alone and 20.2% by VF alone, and 12.1% progressed by both RA and VF. Specificity was estimated to be 95.2% to 98.2% for both VF PLR and RA/time, using the three-omitting criteria and the stringent RA/time criteria, respectively. In this comparison, 8.6% progressed by RA alone, 15.1% by VF alone, and 3.5% by both RA and VF. CONCLUSIONS A relatively high frequency of detected disease progression was observed with either method, with progression by VF occurring at least as frequently as progression by RA. Poor agreement between RA and VF progression was observed regardless of the specificity of the progression criteria. The results indicate that, in patients with ocular hypertension, monitoring of both VF and optic disc is necessary, as agreement between optic disc and VF progression is the exception rather than the rule.

[1]  P. D. E. Fuchs.  Über die Lamina cribrosa , 1916, Albrecht von Graefes Archiv für Ophthalmologie.

[2]  David P Crabb,et al.  A new statistical approach for quantifying change in series of retinal and optic nerve head topography images. , 2005, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[3]  F W Fitzke,et al.  Use of sequential Heidelberg retina tomograph images to identify changes at the optic disc in ocular hypertensive patients at risk of developing glaucoma , 2000, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[4]  A. Tuulonen,et al.  Rate and pattern of neuroretinal rim area decrease in ocular hypertension and glaucoma. , 1992, Archives of ophthalmology.

[5]  S. Gardiner,et al.  Examination of different pointwise linear regression methods for determining visual field progression. , 2002, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[6]  F. Fitzke,et al.  Visual field progression: Comparison of Humphrey Statpac and pointwise linear regression analysis , 1996, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[7]  J. Beiser,et al.  The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: topical medication delays or prevents primary open-angle glaucoma in African American individuals. , 2004, Archives of ophthalmology.

[8]  M. C. Leske,et al.  Reduction of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression: results from the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. , 2002, Archives of ophthalmology.

[9]  B. Bengtsson,et al.  Reliability of computerized perimetric threshold tests as assessed by reliability indices and threshold reproducibility in patients with suspect and manifest glaucoma. , 2000, Acta ophthalmologica Scandinavica.

[10]  S. Hayreh,et al.  Morphologic changes in chronic high-pressure experimental glaucoma in rhesus monkeys. , 1999, Journal of glaucoma.

[11]  A. Sommer,et al.  Estimating progression of visual field loss in glaucoma. , 1997, Ophthalmology.

[12]  B. Chauhan,et al.  Longitudinal changes in the visual field and optic disc in glaucoma , 2005, Progress in Retinal and Eye Research.

[13]  B C Chauhan,et al.  Technique for detecting serial topographic changes in the optic disc and peripapillary retina using scanning laser tomography. , 2000, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[14]  F W Fitzke,et al.  Early detection of visual field progression in glaucoma: a comparison of progressor and statpac 2 , 1997, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[15]  Roger A Hitchings,et al.  Approach for identifying glaucomatous optic nerve progression by scanning laser tomography. , 2003, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[16]  Xiaohui Liu,et al.  A spatio-temporal Bayesian network classifier for understanding visual field deterioration , 2005, Artif. Intell. Medicine.

[17]  Chris A. Johnson,et al.  The Relationship Between Structural and Functional Alterations in Glaucoma: A Review , 2000, Seminars in ophthalmology.

[18]  A. Sadun,et al.  Age-related decline of human optic nerve axon populations , 2006, AGE.

[19]  T. Sejnowski,et al.  Unsupervised machine learning with independent component analysis to identify areas of progression in glaucomatous visual fields. , 2005, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[20]  D. Garway-Heath,et al.  Improving the repeatability of Heidelberg retina tomograph and Heidelberg retina tomograph II rim area measurements , 2005, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[21]  J. Piltz,et al.  Test-retest variability in glaucomatous visual fields. , 1990, American journal of ophthalmology.

[22]  A C Viswanathan,et al.  Detection of optic disc change with the Heidelberg retina tomograph before confirmed visual field change in ocular hypertensives converting to early glaucoma , 1999, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[23]  David P Crabb,et al.  Reducing noise in suspected glaucomatous visual fields by using a new spatial filter , 2004, Vision Research.

[24]  S. Miglior,et al.  Clinical ability of pattern electroretinograms and visual evoked potentials in detecting visual dysfunction in ocular hypertension and glaucoma. , 2006, Ophthalmology.

[25]  C. Johnson,et al.  Simulation of longitudinal threshold visual field data. , 2000, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[26]  Douglas Hoffman,et al.  Pointwise linear regression for evaluation of visual field outcomes and comparison with the advanced glaucoma intervention study methods. , 2005, Archives of ophthalmology.

[27]  P. Lichter,et al.  The Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study: study design, methods, and baseline characteristics of enrolled patients. , 1999, Ophthalmology.

[28]  Jon C. Ervin,et al.  Clinician change detection viewing longitudinal stereophotographs compared to confocal scanning laser tomography in the LSU Experimental Glaucoma (LEG) Study. , 2002, Ophthalmology (Rochester, Minn.).

[29]  Chris A. Johnson,et al.  Comparison of different methods for detecting glaucomatous visual field progression. , 2003, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[30]  Chris A. Johnson,et al.  The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. , 2002, Archives of ophthalmology.

[31]  D. Garway-Heath,et al.  Mapping the visual field to the optic disc in normal tension glaucoma eyes. , 2000, Ophthalmology.

[32]  D G Altman,et al.  Statistics and ethics in medical research. VI--Presentation of results. , 1980, British medical journal.

[33]  Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study. 2. Visual field test scoring and reliability. , 1994, Ophthalmology.

[34]  Valter Torri,et al.  Results of the European Glaucoma Prevention Study. , 2005, Ophthalmology.

[35]  David Garway-Heath,et al.  Results of the betaxolol versus placebo treatment trial in ocular hypertension , 2003, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[36]  M. C. Leske,et al.  Measuring visual field progression in the Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial. , 2003, Acta ophthalmologica Scandinavica.

[37]  D. Garway-Heath,et al.  Reasons for rim area variability in scanning laser tomography. , 2003, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[38]  A. Weber,et al.  Structure-function relations of parasol cells in the normal and glaucomatous primate retina. , 2005, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[39]  J. Tan,et al.  Variability across the optic nerve head in scanning laser tomography , 2003, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[40]  R. A. Hitchings,et al.  Modelling series of visual fields to detect progression in normal-tension glaucoma , 1995, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[41]  M. Hernandez,et al.  Hydrostatic pressure stimulates synthesis of elastin in cultured optic nerve head astrocytes , 2000, Glia.

[42]  D. Garway-Heath,et al.  Factors affecting the test-retest variability of Heidelberg retina tomograph and Heidelberg retina tomograph II measurements , 2005, British Journal of Ophthalmology.

[43]  J. D. Tompkins,et al.  Characteristics of frequency-of-seeing curves in normal subjects, patients with suspected glaucoma, and patients with glaucoma. , 1993, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[44]  P. Artes,et al.  Response variability in the visual field: comparison of optic neuritis, glaucoma, ocular hypertension, and normal eyes. , 2000, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[45]  J. Dobbing.  Statistics and ethics in medical research. , 1981, British medical journal.

[46]  R A Hitchings,et al.  Aging changes of the optic nerve head in relation to open angle glaucoma , 1997, The British journal of ophthalmology.