Advances in perimetry for glaucoma

Caronia Glaucoma Card Versus Amsler Grid for Monitoring Patients With Advanced Glaucoma

PRCIS

Caronia Glaucoma Card (CGC) design incorporates a vertical and horizontal line and seven concentric circles corresponding to 1 o arc at normal reading distance. The study showed that the CGC is preferred by study patients compared to Amsler Grid and can detect central scotomas.

PURPOSE

Evaluate patient acceptance and efficacy of the Caronia Glaucoma Card (CGC) in monitoring patients with severe glaucoma.

METHODS

A retrospective study of consecutive patients with severe glaucoma who agreed to monitor their visual function. Patients were given a two-sided sheet of paper. An Amsler grid was printed on one side, and a CGC was printed on the other side. The patient was given verbal and written instructions on how to perform each test. They were asked to use either one or both tests to monitor their visual function on a weekly basis. Upon return, they were asked which test they preferred and if they appreciated or noticed any change in their scotoma. Patient comments were recorded.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven patients were given the test card whose reported past ocular history consisted solely of severe glaucoma. Seventeen patients were eventually excluded. Fourteen patients had 1 eye that fulfilled the inclusion criteria for the study, while the other eye was excluded. Eighty-six eyes of fifty patients satisfied the inclusion criteria and were enrolled in the study. Thirty of the patients were male (60%) and 20 were female (40%). The average age was 71.8 +/- 10.7 years. They all carried a diagnosis of severe glaucoma. When asked the question which test design they preferred to use, 30 patients preferred the CGC (60%), while 8 patients preferred the Amsler grid (16%). Twelve patients found no difference between the 2 test designs (24%). [χ 2 (2, 50)=16.480, ρ=0.000]. Five patients noticed a change in their scotoma while using the card (5.8%, 5 of 86 eyes). All were exclusively using the CGC.

CONCLUSION

The CGC is a convenient and inexpensive tool that was able to detect a change in scotoma. It may be helpful to add to the armamentarium to monitor glaucoma and its possible progression in patients with advanced disease.

Virtual reality headsets for perimetry testing: a systematic review

Standard automated perimetery is considered the gold standard for evaluating a patient's visual field. However, it is costly and requires a fixed testing environment. In response, perimetric devices using virtual reality (VR) headsets have emerged as an alternative way to measure visual fields in patients. This systematic review aims to characterize both novel and established VR headsets in the literature and explore their potential applications within visual field testing. A search was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and the Core Collection (Web of Science) for articles published until January 2023. Subject headings and keywords related to virtual reality and visual field were used to identify studies specific to this topic. Records were first screened by title/abstract and then by full text using predefined criteria. Data was extracted accordingly. A total of 2404 records were identified from the databases. After deduplication and the two levels of screening, 64 studies describing 36 VR headset perimetry devices were selected for extraction. These devices encompassed various visual field measurement techniques, including static and kinetic perimetry, with some offering vision rehabilitation capabilities. This review reveals a growing consensus that VR headset perimetry devices perform comparably to, or even better than, standard automated perimetry. They are better tolerated by patients in terms of gaze fixation, more cost-effective, and generally more accessible for patients with limited mobility.

Comparing a head-mounted virtual reality perimeter and the Humphrey Field Analyzer for visual field testing in healthy and glaucoma patients

PURPOSE

To compare clinical visual field outputs in glaucoma and healthy patients returned by the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) and virtual reality (Virtual Field, VF) perimetry.

METHODS

One eye of 54 glaucoma patients and 41 healthy subjects was prospectively tested (three times each in random order) using the HFA and VF perimeters (24-2 test grids). We extracted and compared global indices (mean deviation [MD] and pattern standard deviation [PSD]), pointwise sensitivity (and calculated 'equivalent' sensitivity after accounting for differences in background luminance) and pointwise defects. Bland-Altman (mean difference [Mdiff ] and 95% limits of agreement [LoA]) and intraclass correlation analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The VF test was shorter (by 76 s) and had lower fixation losses (by 0.08) and false-positive rate (by 0.01) compared to the HFA (all p < 0.0001). Intraclass correlations were 0.86, 0.82 and 0.47 for MD, PSD and pointwise sensitivity between devices, respectively. Test-retest variability was higher for VF (Mdiff 0.3 dB, LoA -7.6 to 8.2 dB) compared to the HFA (Mdiff -0.3 dB, LoA -6.4 to 5.9 dB), indicating greater test-retest variability. When using each device's underlying normative database, the HFA detected, on average, 7 more defects (at the p < 0.05 level) out of the 52 test locations compared to this iteration of VF in the glaucoma cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Virtual Field returns global results that are correlated with the HFA, but pointwise sensitivities were more variable. Differences in test-retest variability and defect detection by its current normative database raise questions about the widespread adoption of VF in lieu of the HFA.

Long-Term Effects on Retinal Structure and Function in a Mouse Endothelin-1 Model of Retinal Ganglion Cell Degeneration

Purpose

To study the long-term effects of endothelin-1 (ET-1)-induced retinal pathologies in mouse, using clinically relevant tools.

Methods

Adult C57BL/6 mice (7-9 weeks old) were intravitreally injected with PBS (n = 10) or 0.25 (n = 8), 0.5 (n = 8), or 1 nmol ET-1 (n = 9) and examined using electroretinogram, optical coherence tomography (OCT), and Doppler OCT at baseline and postinjection days 10, 28, and 56. Retinal ganglion cell (RGC) survival in retinal whole mount was quantified at days 28 and 56.

Results

ET-1 induced immediate retinal arterial constriction. The significantly reduced total blood flow and positive scotopic threshold response in the 0.5- and 1-nmol ET-1 groups at day 10 were recovered at day 28. A-wave magnitude was also significantly reduced at days 10 and 28. While a comparable and significant reduction in retinal nerve fiber layer thickness was detected in all ET-1 groups at day 56, the 1-nmol group was the earliest to develop such change at day 28. All ET-1 groups showed a transient inner retinal layer thinning at days 10 and 28 and a plateaued outer layer thickness at days 10 to 56. The 1-nmol group showed a significant RGC loss over all retinal locations examined at day 28 as compared with PBS control. As for the lower-dosage groups, significant RGC density loss at central and midperipheral retina was detected at day 56 when compared with day 28.

Conclusions

ET-1 injection in mice resulted in a transient vascular constriction and reduction in retinal functions, as well as a gradual loss of retinal nerve fiber layer and RGC in a dose-dependent manner.

Comparison of a New Head Mount Virtual Reality Perimeter (C3 Field Analyzer) With Automated Field Analyzer in Neuro-Ophthalmic Disorders

BACKGROUND

Automated perimetry in neurologically disabled patients is a challenge. We have devised a patient-friendly virtual reality perimeter, the C3 field analyzer (CFA). We aim to assess the utility of this as a visual field-testing device in neuro-ophthalmic patients for screening and monitoring.

METHODS

Neuro-ophthalmic patients and controls were selected to participate in the study between September and December 2018. They randomly underwent either the CFA or automated field analyzer (HFA) first followed by the other in an undilated state. The CFA results were compared with the HFA, and the correlation of the pattern of the field defect was assessed by an independent masked physician.

RESULTS

In total, 59 eyes of 33 neuro-ophthalmic patients (cases) and another 95 normal individuals (controls) were enrolled. CFA was found to have greater proportion of reliable fields (81.4%) than HFA (59.3%) ( P = 0.009). There were less false negatives ( P < 0.001) and more false positives in CFA ( P < 0.001) among neuro-ophthalmic patients compared with controls. Among neuro-ophthalmology patients, the number of fixation losses was greater with CFA ( P < 0.001), whereas false negatives were greater in HFA ( P < 0.001). On assessing the pattern of the field defects, we found that there was almost 70% correlation of CFA with HFA. Moreover, in classical neurological fields such as hemianopia, the correlation was 87.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

The CFA seems to correlate well with HFA in classic neurological fields such as hemianopias and may serve as an alternative in patients unable to perform a standard automated perimetry. Further developments are currently underway to incorporate threshold testing.

Online Circular Contrast Perimetry: A Comparison to Standard Automated Perimetry

PURPOSE

The aim was to validate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of a novel 24-degree, 52-loci online circular contrast perimetry (OCCP) application to standard automated perimetry (SAP).

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

METHODS

Two hundred and twenty participants (125 normal controls, 95 open angle glaucoma patients) were included. Agreement, correlation, sensitivity, specificity, and area under receiver operating curves (AUC) were compared for parameters of OCCP, SAP, and optical coherence tomography (OCT) for the retinal nerve fiber layer and macular ganglion cell complex inner plexiform layer.

RESULTS

Pointwise sensitivity for OCCP was greater than SAP by 1.02 log units (95% CI: 0.95-1.08); 95% limits of agreement 0.860 to 1.17. Correlation and agreement for global indices and regional zones between OCCP and SAP were strong. OCCP mean deviation (MD) AUC was 0.885±0.08, similar to other instruments' parameters with the highest AUC: SAP MD (0.851±0.08), OCT retinal nerve fiber layer inferior thickness (0.908±0.07), OCT ganglion cell complex inner plexiform layer inferior thickness (0.849±0.08), P>0.05. At best cutoff, OCCP MD sensitivity/specificity were comparable to SAP MD (90/74 vs 94/65%).

CONCLUSIONS

OCCP demonstrates similar perimetric sensitivities to SAP and similar AUC to SAP and OCT in distinguishing glaucoma patients from controls. OCCP holds promise as a glaucoma surveillance and screening tool, with the potential to be utilized for in-clinic and at-home perimetry and expand community testing.

Circular Contrast Perimetry via Web Application: A Patient Appraisal and Comparison to Standard Automated Perimetry

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to compare a novel, 24°, 52-locus online circular contrast perimetry (OCCP) application against standard automated perimetry (SAP) in terms of both diagnostic accuracy and patient attitudes.

Design

This was a cross-sectional study.

Subjects

Ninety-five participants (42 controls and 53 open-angle glaucoma patients) were included.

Methods

Participants performed both perimetry tests and then completed an online survey. Subjective feedback responses were collected.

Main Outcome Measures

Agreement, sensitivity, specificity, and area under receiver operating curves (AUCs) were compared for the parameters of OCCP, SAP, and OCT for the retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) and macular ganglion cell complex inner plexiform layer (GCC + IPL). Participant attitudes toward the OCCP test versus the SAP test, in both glaucoma patients and controls, were compared. Rasch analysis assessed the psychometric properties of the survey and intergroup variability.

Results

The AUC for OCCP mean deviation (MD) was 0.959 ± 0.02. Compared with other instruments' parameters with the highest AUC, it was superior to SAP MD (0.871 ± 0.04, P = 0.03) and OCT GCC + IPL (0.871 ± 0.04, P = 0.03) and similar to OCT RNFL inferior thickness (IT) (0.917 ± 0.03, no significance). Online circular contrast perimetry pointwise sensitivity was less than SAP by 4.30 dB (95% confidence interval = 4.02-4.59); 95% limits of agreement ranged from -6.28 to -2.33 dB. At the best cutoff, the OCCP MD had a sensitivity of 98% and specificity of 85% for detecting glaucoma. Cohen's kappa demonstrated good agreement with SAP MD (0.69) and OCT RNFL IT (0.62) and moderate agreement with OCT GCC + IPL IT (0.57). Participants preferred OCCP across most survey parameters (P < 0.0001). Rasch analysis demonstrated no differential item functioning for clinical group, gender, or age.

Conclusions

With similar diagnostic metrics to SAP, OCCP offers an improved user experience with the potential to increase the provision of care and improve disease surveillance outcomes.

Online circular contrast perimetry via a web-application: optimising parameters and establishing a normative database

PURPOSE

To establish a normative database and optimise parameters for personal-computer based perimetry via a web-application using circular contrast targets.

METHODS

Online 24-degree 52-loci perimetry was delivered through a web-application using circular flickering contrast targets. Embedding contrast differentials within targets allows calculation of relative decibel (rdB) per 256-bit greyscale level differential. Target light-band maximum brightness colour was fixed, while the dark-band varied to achieve the desired rdB level. A staircase system was used with two reversals ranging from 0 to 36 rdB levels. Blind spot localisation at the start of the test was used to optimise viewing distance and subsequently count fixation losses. Gaze was maintained on a spinning golden star which moves mid-test to maximise sampling area. Patients performed the test to each eye separately using a computer in a darkened room at 40-45 cm.

RESULTS

158 eyes of 101 patients completed the Online Circular Contrast Perimetry (OCCP) test. Mean age was 62.9 ± 14.3 years old. Mean sensitivity reduced with age, at 1.0 relative decibel per decade. Mean sensitivity per locus correlated with standard automated perimetry (SAP) in a physiological hill of vision, with an average difference of 4.02 decibels (95% confidence interval (CI) = 3.77-4.27, p < 0.001) and good agreement between tests.

CONCLUSIONS

Online circular contract perimetry provides accurate perimetric testing with comparable results to standard automated perimetry.

The Open Perimetry Initiative: A framework for cross-platform development for the new generation of portable perimeters

The Open Perimetry Initiative was formed in 2010 with the aim of reducing barriers to clinical research with visual fields and perimetry. Our two principal tools are the Open Perimetry Interface (OPI) and the visualFields package with analytical tools. Both are fully open source. The OPI package contains a growing number of drivers for commercially available perimeters, head-mounted devices, and virtual reality headsets. The visualFields package contains tools for the analysis and visualization of visual field data, including methods to compute deviation values and probability maps. We introduce a new frontend, the opiApp, that provides tools for customization for visual field testing and can be used as a frontend to run the OPI. The app can be used on the Octopus 900 (Haag-Streit), the Compass (iCare), the AP 7000 (Kowa), and the IMO (CREWT) perimeters, with permission from the device manufacturers. The app can also be used on Android phones with virtual reality headsets via a new driver interface, the PhoneHMD, implemented on the OPI. The use of the tools provided by the OPI library is showcased with a custom static automated perimetry test for the full visual field (up to 50 degrees nasally and 80 degrees temporally) developed with the OPI driver for the Octopus 900 and using visualFields for statistical analysis. With more than 60 citations in clinical and translational science journals, this initiative has contributed significantly to expand research in perimetry. The continued support of researchers, clinicians, and industry are key in transforming perimetry research into an open science.