Computer perimetry indices in glaucoma stage assessment
https://doi.org/10.25700/NJG.2019.02.05
Abstract
Purpose: To study the role of Octopus computer visual field indices in assessing the stages of the glaucomatous process. Successful treatment of primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) largely depends on the possibility of reliable control of its effectiveness. The system of POAG early detection and monitoring has significant problems: insufficient clinical coverage of the population, poor quality of patients’ examination at the outpatient level. Standard automated perimetry (SAP) is the golden standard in glaucoma diagnosis and is suitable for a life-long clinical examination of POAG patients. Currently, ophthalmologists do not fully use all the features of this method to determine the stages of POAG.
Methods: The study included 150 patients with POAG (284 eyes). According to the results of the study in 102 patients with POAG (193 eyes), exclusion criteria that affect the reliability of SAP indicators were identified The results were evaluated in 48 patients (91 eyes) with POAG diagnosed at least 2 years prior. This group included 27 women (56.3%) and 21 men (43.7%), the average age of patients was 64±10.2 (σ=0.036). The control group consisted of 26 people (52 eyes) — 16 women (61.5%) and 10 men (38.5%). The average age of these subjects was 61±9.0 years. (σ=0.030). All patients underwent a study of the central visual field on the Octopus-101 perimeter (Switzerland), G2 program (glaucomatous test).
Results: The corrected loss variance index (СLV) of the Octopus computer visual field analyzer is the most important for determining of the stage of glaucoma. The СLV index less than 8 dB is found in patients without glaucoma. The CLV index interval from 8.1 dB to 19.0 dB corresponds to stage I of POAG, from 19.1 dB to 36.0 dB — to stage II of POAG and the CLV index value of more than 36.1 dB corresponds to stage III of POAG.
Conclusion: Glaucoma stage of can be determined not only by the location and depth of the central visual field loss but also based on the evaluation of statistical indicators available in a number of models of automated perimeters. Based on that, we propose a screening method for glaucoma stage assessment in outpatient clinic conditions.
About the Authors
L. A. ZaporozhetsRussian Federation
M.D.
45 Lunacharsky Ave, Saint-Petersburg, Russian Federation, 194291
E. B. Martynova
Russian Federation
Ph.D, Associate professor, Department of Ophthalmology.
41 Kirochnaya st., Saint-Petersburg, Russian Federation, 191015
M. A. Levko
Russian Federation
Ph.D,, Associate professor, Department of Ophthalmology.
41 Kirochnaya st., Saint-Petersburg, Russian Federation, 191015
O. A. Malevannaya
Russian Federation
Ph.D, Associate professor, Department of Ophthalmology.
41 Kirochnaya st., Saint-Petersburg, Russian Federation, 191015
References
1. Libman E.S., Chumaeva E.A. El’kina Ja.Je. Epidemiological features of glaucoma. In: HRT club Russia. Moscow; 2006: 75-78. (In Russ.).
2. Alekseeva I.B. Rating system for early detection and monitoring of POAG. In: Materials of the X Congress of ophthalmologists of Russia. Moscow; 2015: 35. (In Russ.).
3. Weinreb R.N., Greve E.L. Glaucoma diagnosis, structure and function: reports and consensus statements of the 1st global AIGS Consensus meeting on «structure and function in the management of glaucoma». The Hague: Kugler Publications; 2004.
4. Simakova I.L. The role of perimetry with double frequency in the early diagnosis of glaucoma. In: Glaucoma: problems and solutions: all-Russian scientificpractical conference. Sat. scientific. article. Moscow; 2004; 117-120. (In Russ.).
5. Volkov V.V. Standards to assess the presence, course and treatment of glaucoma according to the recommendations of experts of the International Association of glaucoma injure of the sight of societies (part 1). Natsionalniy zhurnal glaucoma. 2012; 2:62–66. (In Russ.).
6. Volkov V.V. Standards to assess the presence, course and treatment of glaucoma according to the recommendations of experts of the International Association of glaucoma injure of the sight of societies (part 2). Natsionalniy zhurnal glaucoma. 2012; 3:48–52. (In Russ.).
7. Simakova I.D., Serdjukova S.A. Advantages and disadvantages of computer perimetry in detecting glaucoma. In: Materials of the X Congress of ophthalmologists of Russia. Moscow.; 2015: 315-316. (In Russ.).
8. Simakova I.D., Suhinin M.V., Serdjukova S.A. The effectiveness of various methods of computer perimetry in diagnosing primary open-angle glaucoma. Part 1. Natsionalniy zhurnal glaucoma. 2016; 15(1):25–36. (In Russ.).
9. Simakova I.D., Suhinin M.V., Serdjukova S.A. The effectiveness of various methods of computer perimetry in diagnosing primary open-angle glaucoma. Part 2. Natsionalniy zhurnal glaucoma. 2016; 15(2):44–52. (In Russ.).
10. Egorov E.A., Astahov Ju.S., Shhuko A.G. Nacional’noe rukovodstvo po glaukome dlja praktikujushhih vrachej [National guidance on glaucoma for practitioners]. Moscow: GEOTAR-Media; 2015. 456 p. (In Russ.).
11. Nesterov A.P. Glaucoma [Glaucoma]. Moscow: Medicine; 1995, 256 p. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Zaporozhets L.A., Martynova E.B., Levko M.A., Malevannaya O.A. Computer perimetry indices in glaucoma stage assessment. National Journal glaucoma. 2019;18(2):38-46. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25700/NJG.2019.02.05