A Comparison of 24-2C Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA) Faster and 10-2 SITA Standard for Detecting Damage in the Macula in Mild-Stage Glaucoma.
Euido Nishijima, Ryosuke Ito, Kei Sano, Yuka Igari, Sachiyo Okude, Takahiko Noro, Shumpei Ogawa, Gary C Lee, Aiko Iwase, Tadashi Nakano
Summary
24-2C SITA Faster is a noninferior and more time-efficient alternative to 10-2 SITA Standard for detecting macular damage in mild-stage glaucoma; however, 10-2 SITA Standard may be considered superior for detecting subtle macular defects using PD.
Abstract
PURPOSE
To compare the diagnostic accuracy of 24-2C Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA) Faster and 10-2 SITA Standard in detecting macular damage in mild-stage glaucoma.
DESIGN
Multicenter diagnostic accuracy study based on prospectively collected data.
PARTICIPANTS
In total, 108 eyes from 108 patients with mild-stage glaucoma (normal-tension glaucoma, 58; high-tension glaucoma, 50) and 52 eyes from 52 healthy controls at the Jikei University School of Medicine and Tajimi Iwase Eye Clinic.
METHODS
Participants underwent 24-2C SITA Faster and 10-2 SITA Standard visual field testing on the same day, in randomized order. OCT with ganglion cell analysis identified macular damage. McNemar test and noninferiority analysis (10% margin) compared detection accuracy. Test durations were compared using pairwise t-tests.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Sensitivity and specificity of 24-2C SITA Faster and 10-2 SITA Standard for detecting macular damage and test duration.
RESULTS
For overall macular damage, 24-2C SITA Faster demonstrated sensitivity or specificity of 0.64/0.93 (total deviation [TD]) and 0.67/0.93 (pattern deviation [PD]), while 10-2 SITA Standard demonstrated 0.69/0.94 (TD) and 0.77/0.93 (PD). McNemar test revealed no significant difference, and 24-2C SITA Faster was noninferior within the 10% margin. Subanalysis with a strict 5% margin, revealed that 10-2 SITA Standard was superior to 24-2C SITA Faster when using PD plot for all parameters. The mean test duration was significantly shorter for 24-2C SITA Faster (158.5 seconds) than for 10-2 SITA Standard (330.0 seconds; P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
24-2C SITA Faster is a noninferior and more time-efficient alternative to 10-2 SITA Standard for detecting macular damage in mild-stage glaucoma; however, 10-2 SITA Standard may be considered superior for detecting subtle macular defects using PD. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
Keywords
More by Euido Nishijima
View full profile →Comparative Analysis of 24-2C, 24-2, and 10-2 Visual Field Tests for Detecting Mild-Stage Glaucoma With Central Visual field Defects.
A Novel Visual Field Screening Program for Glaucoma With a Head-Mounted Perimeter.
Correlation of Binocular Perimetry Screening Using imo: A Portable Head Mounted Perimeter With 10-2 Standard Automated Perimetry for Early Glaucoma With Central Visual Field Defects.
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).
In the Knowledge Library
Discussion
Comments and discussion will appear here in a future update.