Abstract
Purpose To evaluate the correlation between computerised visual field testing and optic disc morphometric parameters (rim area, rim/ disc area ratio, cup/disc area ratio and optic disc surface smoothness (ODSS)) in the follow-up of a group of patients affected by primary open angle glaucoma (POAG).
Methods Reliable automated perimetry (Humphrey 640 VFA, central 30-2 threshold program) was performed at T0 (the enrolment time), T1 (after 6 ± 1 months;range 5-7 months), T2 (12 ± 1 months), T3 (18 ± 1 months), and T4 (the end of the follow-up period: 24 ± 2 months) in one eye randomly chosen from each of 30 POAG patients. Computerised optic disc analysis (IMAGEnet X Rev-3-51b, Topcon Europe, The Netherlands) was performed at T0 and T4. To evaluate the correlation between morphometric parameters and computerised visual field testing, the stability or worsening of visual field test was evaluated by means of ‘Mean Deviation linear regression analysis’ (STATPAC 2 software); that of morphometric parameters was studied using their coefficients of variation. A rank of ′0′ was assigned to stability and a rank of ″1″ to worsening. The Spearman rank correlation coefficient was used to evaluate statistically the correlations between visual field analysis and morphometric parameters. Furthermore kappa statistic was used to evaluate the agreement of morphometric parameter changes with visual field progression analysis.
Results According to the MD slope regression analysis, in 18 patients the visual fields were stable while in 12 they were worsening during the follow-up period. In 86.65% of patients (n = 26) the morphometric parameter ODSS and visual field analysis were concordant (p <0.0001). In 80% of patients (n = 24) the cup/ disc area ratio and visual field analysis were concordant (p < 0.001). The other morphometric parameters (rim area, rim/disc area ratio) were less correlated with visual field analysis than ODSS (p < 0.05). The agreement of visual field analysis with all the morphometric parameters was good (kappa = 0.690, 95% confidence interval (CI) of kappa = 0.589-0.790). The agreement of visual field analysis with ODSS and cup/disc area (kappa = 0.688;95% CI = 0.511-0.864) was better than the agreement of visual field analysis with rim area and rim/disc area ratio (kappa = 0.438;95% CI = 0.260-0.655).
Conclusion Analysis of the progression of visual field damage and optic nerve head morphometric parameters should both be taken into account in glaucoma follow-up. Among the morphometric parameters evaluated by means of Topcon IMAGEnet, ODSS and (to a lesser extent) the cup/disc ratio should have the greatest weight.
Similar content being viewed by others
Article PDF
References
Rolando M, Macrì A, Altieri M, Iester M . Morphometric analysis of the optic disc surface: the level of smoothness as a diagnostic parameter for glaucoma. Int Ophthalmol 1997;20:15–20.
Miglior S, Brigatti L, Lonati C, Rossetti L, Pierrottet C, Orzalesi N . Correlation between the progression of optic disc and visual field changes in glaucoma. Curr Eye Res 1996;15:145–50.
Lachkar Y, Cohn H . Nerve fiber analysis and optic disc parameters with the glaucoma-scope. Int Ophthalmol 1996;20:33–8.
Komulainen R, Tuulonen A, Airaksinen PJ . The follow-up of patients screened for glaucoma with non-mydriatic fundus photography. Int Ophthalmol 1992;16:465–9.
Funk J, Bornscheuer C, Grehen F . Neuroretinal rim area and visual field in glaucoma. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1988;226:431–4.
Coleman AL, Sommer A, Enger C, Knopf HL, Stamper RL, Minckler DS . Interobserver and intraobserver variability in the detection of glaucomatous progression of the optic disc. J Glaucoma 1996;5:384–9.
Bartz-Schmidt KU, Sundtgen M, Widder RA, Weber J, Krieglstein GK . Limits of two-dimensional planimetry in the follow-up of glaucomatous optic discs. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1995;233:284–90.
Caprioli J . The contour of the juxtapapillary nerve fiber layer in glaucoma. Ophthalmology 1990;97:358–65.
Caprioli J . Clinical evaluation of the optic nerve in glaucoma. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 1994;92:589–641.
Varma R . The Topcon Image Analyzer. In: Varma R, Spaeth GL, Parker KW, editors. The optic nerve in glaucoma. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott, 1993:255–68.
Uchida H, Brigatti L, Caprioli J . Detection of structural damage from glaucoma with confocal laser image analysis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1996;37:2393–401.
Caprioli J . The contour of the juxtapapillary nerve fiber layer in glaucoma. Ophthalmology 1990;97:358–65.
Iester M, Mikelberg FS, Drance SM . The effect of optic disc size on diagnostic precision with the Heidelberg retina tomograph. Ophthalmology 1997;104:545–8.
Rolando M, Macrì A, Iester M . Optic disc surface smoothness and visual field indices. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1998, in press.
Caprioli J, Prum B, Zeyen T . Comparison of methods to evaluate the optic nerve head and nerve fiber layer for glaucomatous change. Am J Ophthalmol 1996;121:659–67.
Caprioli J, Miller JM . Correlation of structure and function in glaucoma: quantitative measurements of disc and field. Ophthalmology 1988;95:723–7.
Nanba K, Iwata K . Optic disc measurements with computerised image analysis in normals, ocular hypertensives and glaucomas. Nippon Ganka Gakkai Zasshi 1991;95:174–83.
Jonas JB, Grundler AE . Correlation between mean visual field loss and morphometric optic disk variables in the open-angle glaucomas. Am J Ophthalmol 1997;124:488–97.
Iester M, Mikelberg FS, Courtright P, Drance SM . Correlation between the visual field indices and Heidelberg retina tomograph parameters. J Glaucoma 1997;6:78–82.
Airaksinen PJ, Drance SM, Douglas GR, Schulzer M . Neuroretinal rim areas and visual field indices in glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 1985;99:107–10.
Quigley HA, Katz J, Derick RJ, Gilbert D, Sommer A . An evaluation of optic disc and nerve fiber layer examinations in monitoring progression of early glaucoma damage. Ophthalmology 1992;99:19–28.
Pederson JE, Anderson DR . The mode of progressive disc cupping in ocular hypertension and glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 1980;98:490–5.
Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA, Poinoosawmy D, McNaught AI, Crabb DP . Analysis of visual field progression in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 1996;80:40–8.
McNaught AI, Crabb DP, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA . Visual field progression: comparison of Humphrey Statpac 2 and pointwise linear regression analysis. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1996;234:411–8.
Katz J, Sommer A, Gaasterland DE, Anderson DR . Comparison of analytic algorithms for detecting glaucomatous visual field loss. Arch Ophthalmol 1991;109:1684–9.
Enger C, Sommer A . Recognizing glaucomatous field loss with the Humphrey STATPAC. Arch Ophthalmol 1987;105:1355–7.
Nouri-Mahdavi K, Brigatti L, Weitzman M, Caprioli J . Comparison of methods to detect visual field progression in glaucoma. Ophthalmology 1997;104:1228–36.
Birch MK, Wishart PK, O'Donnell NP . Determining progressive visual field loss in serial Humphrey visual fields. Ophthalmology 1995;102:1227–35.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Macri, A., Rolando, M., Corallo, G. et al. A comparative study of computerised visual field testing and optic disc morphometric parameters in the follow-up of primary open angle glaucoma. Eye 12, 916–920 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.1998.238
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.1998.238