Comparison of Rates of Fast and Catastrophic Visual Field Loss in Three Glaucoma Subtypes.
Andrew J Anderson, Abadh K Chaurasia, Ajay Sharma, Amisha Gupta, Shikha Gupta, Anurag Khanna, Viney Gupta
Summary
Differences in fast and catastrophic visual field progression can exist despite only small changes in median progression rates, highlighting the importance of considering the full shape of the progression rate distribution when comparing the risk…
Abstract
PURPOSE
To compare the distribution of visual field progression rates in three subgroups of glaucoma, being primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG), POAG, and juvenile open-angle glaucoma (JOAG).
METHODS
We assessed glaucoma patients treated in an Indian tertiary care setting with at least four visual field assessments. We determined rates from a single eye of each of 525 patients using linear regression of the summary index mean deviation (MD) over time. The main outcome measures were the proportions of fast (<-1.0 to -2.0 dB/y) and catastrophic (<-2 dB/y) visual field progression. Bootstrapped 95% CIs allowed comparison with published data from a large clinical cohort in Canada.
RESULTS
The combined proportion of fast and catastrophic progressors in our cohort was less than half that in the Canada dataset (2.3% vs. 5.8%), despite median progression rates differing by only 0.03 dB/y. PACG, POAG, and JOAG represented 45%, 32%, and 12% of our cohort, respectively. Baseline MD values were similarly distributed between these subtypes. All subtypes showed a similar shaped distribution for progression rates, with median progression rates of -0.03, -0.05, and 0.02 dB/y for PACG, POAG, and JOAG, respectively. Combined proportions of fast and catastrophic progression rates did not significantly differ between subtypes.
CONCLUSIONS
Differences in fast and catastrophic visual field progression can exist despite only small changes in median progression rates, highlighting the importance of considering the full shape of the progression rate distribution when comparing the risk of devastating visual field loss.
More by Andrew J Anderson
View full profile →Can Home Monitoring Allow Earlier Detection of Rapid Visual Field Progression in Glaucoma?
Significant Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression in the First Two Years: What Does It Mean?
Exercise and Glaucoma: Positive Steps Toward Finding Another Modifiable Risk Factor to Prevent Vision Loss.
Top Research in Visual Field
Browse all →Optical coherence tomography angiography: A comprehensive review of current methods and clinical applications.
Relationship between Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography Vessel Density and Severity of Visual Field Loss in Glaucoma.
Improving our understanding, and detection, of glaucomatous damage: An approach based upon optical coherence tomography (OCT).
Discussion
Comments and discussion will appear here in a future update.