Comparison of Far Peripheral Visual Fields in East-Asian and Caucasian Subjects.

Objective

To compare peripheral visual field performance and facial contour-dependent visual field defects between East Asian and Caucasian participants using both kinetic and static perimetry.

Design

Cross-sectional observational study.

Participants

Forty-seven healthy participants, including 25 East Asian individuals (Chinese, Japanese, or Korean ethnicity) and 22 Caucasian individuals, confirmed to have no ocular pathology on clinical examination and optical coherence tomography (OCT).

Intervention

All participants underwent visual field testing using the 60-4 threshold test on the Humphrey Field Analyzer II and kinetic perimetry on the Octopus perimeter. Three-dimensional facial reconstructions were generated from 2D facial photographs using neural network-enabled analysis to predict facial contour-dependent visual field obstructions.

Main outcome measures

Sum of threshold sensitivities from the 60-4 test, peripheral field extent at specified angles (0°-330°) on kinetic perimetry, and the number of predicted and observed facial contour-dependent visual field defects.

Results

East Asian participants showed significantly fewer predicted and observed facial contour-dependent defects compared to Caucasian participants (OS: 3 ± 0.09 vs 6 ± 0.08, P < .0001; OD: 2 ± 0.06 vs 4 ± 0.08, P < .001). Kinetic perimetry revealed extended peripheral field extent in East Asians in the inferior nasal quadrant at 300° and 330° (FDR < 0.05). The 60-4 test showed higher threshold sensitivity in select inferior nasal locations among East Asians.

Conclusion

Ethnicity-linked anatomical differences, particularly facial contour, may influence peripheral visual field performance. These findings support integrating facial structure and race-based context into the interpretation of visual field tests and highlight the value of combining kinetic and static perimetry.