vf in glau (basic course)
TRANSCRIPT
Visual Fields in Glaucoma
Cesar A. Perez Jr MD DPBO Philippine Glaucoma Society
Definition of Visual Field
■ The visual field is that portion of the external environment of the observer wherein the steadily fixating eye can detect visual stimuli
International Perimetric Society (1978)
Extent of the Visual Field
Anderson RA. Automated Static Perimetry
Temporal fieldNasal field
60°
90°
70°
60° 30°
Blind spot
Why only the central 30 degrees?
Visual Field vs Anatomy
Anderson RA. Automated Static Perimetry
Traquair’s Island of Vision
Definition of Perimetry
■ Measurement of visual functions of the eye at topographically defined loci in the visual field1
■ Measures differential light sensitivity, or the ability of a subject to distinguish a stimulus light from background illumination2
1. International Perimetric Society (1978) 2. American Academy of Ophthalmology
Clinical Perimetry■ Two major perimetry types
➢ Manual kinetic
➢ Automated static (gold standard)
Automated Static Threshold Perimetry■ Measures the retina's sensitivity to
light at predetermined locations in the visual field
■ While the patient focuses on the point of fixation, stimuli are presented in random order at each of the predetermined locations w/in the visual field
static achromatic stimulus (Gold Standard)
Clinical PerimetryStimulus size
Size V
Size III (standard)Blind spot
Apostilbs (Asb) (luminance)
Humphrey Decibels (dB) (sensitivity)
Octopus Decibels (dB)
0.1 50 40
1 40 30
1000 10 0
10,000 0 -
Clinical Perimetry
Clinical Perimetry
▪ Stimulus intensity is varied but w/ fixed size & duration ➢Determines the minimum intensity at w/c
patient responds to 50% of the time (threshold)
▪ Determined by bracketing - stimulus intensities moved above & below the threshold
Threshold strategy
Clinical Perimetry“Bracketing” reveals the threshold
Infrathreshold (can’t be seen)
Suprathreshold (seen)
Why test the Visual Field?
■ Defines state of optic nerve function ■ Defines visual impairment1
■ To detect eye diseases (glaucoma, retinal, neuro-ophtha, etc)
■ To monitor an eye disease/visual impairment
1. Asia Pacific Glaucoma Guidelines (2003-2004)
What is being tested in Perimetry?■ Light sensitivity is measured in
different retinal areas ➢Foveal/central areas more sensitive than
peripheral areas
■ Light sensitivity compared to a normative database derived from multicenter studies
Interconnecting cells ▪ Bipolar ▪ Horizontal ▪ Amacrine cells
Visual Physiology of the Retina
Light
photoreceptors
RPE
Transmitting cells ▪ Ganglion cellsG G
Humphrey & Octopus practical reading system
Parameters Reliability Age Corrected plots Tests (GHT/Bebie curve) Indices Correlate clinically Evaluate
7 Steps – 5 zones (PRACTICE) HumphreyTM OctopusTM
1) P 2) R 3) AC 4) T 5) I 6) C 7) E
34 5
12 HumphreyTM
• 5 Zones • Counter-clockwise
1) Parameters 2) Reliability 3) Age Corrected 4) Tests 5) Indices 6) Correlate
clinically 7) Evaluate
1
23
4
5
OctopusTM
• 5 Zones • Clockwise
1) Parameters 2) Reliability 3) Age Corrected 4) Tests 5) Indices 6) Correlate
clinically 7) Evaluate
▪ Test strategy ➢ Full threshold, SITA-standard, SITA fast
▪ Region/pattern used ➢ 30-2, 24-2, 10-2
▪ Patient details ➢date of birth, date of VF, pupil size, test time, VA, correction, eye tested
1.Parameters HumphreyTM
Perimetry Programs■ Full Threshold 30-2
■ Standard ■ 18-20 minutes per eye ■ 4-2-1 staircase with double crossover for
Octopus; 4-2 staircase for Humphrey ■ Light stimulus size is standard (Goldmann
Size III)
Full threshold
HumphreyTM
SITA Standard▪ Diagnostic sensitivity similar to full
threshold (both 95%)1 ▪ Sensitivity, specificity, characterization, &
reliability of determining VF properties > vs other threshold tests2-4
▪ 50% reduction in testing times ➢ 4 minutes for a normal field ➢ 8 minutes for a glaucoma field
1. Delgado, et al, Ophthalmology Dec 2002 2. Bengtsson B, et al. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1998 3. Bengtsson, B, Heijl. A. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1998 4. Budenz DL, et al. Ophthalmology. 2002
HumphreyTM
SITA - Standard
■ 2-6 minutes ➢ 3 minutes normal field ➢ 5.5 minutes glaucoma field
■ 93% sensitivity vs 95% for SITA standard1 For patients : Younger ➢ Restless ➢ “Learning”
1. Delgado, et al, Ophthalmology Dec 2002
SITA Fast
• 24-2 tests 54 points • 30-2 tests 76 points
24-2 or 30-2? HumphreyTM
10-2? • For advanced
glaucoma • Tests 68 points
in the central 10 degrees
HumphreyTM
advanced glaucoma 30-2
HumphreyTM
12
HumphreyTM
1) Parameters 2) Reliability
Is the field reliable?▪ false (+): pressing button even w/o
visual stimulus
▪ false (-): failure to respond to a threshold stimulus previously seen at the same point
▪ if > 33% FP or FN, then unreliable
▪ if > 20% fixation losses then unreliable
3
12 HumphreyTM
1) Parameters 2) Reliability 3) Age Corrected
Compare total & pattern deviation
3.Age Corrected plots HumphreyTM
Zero in on the probability plots
Compare total deviation (TD) & pattern deviation (PD) probability plots HumphreyTM
▪ If defect in TD & PD plots look similar ➢ Focal field defect
▪ Depressed TD w/ a normal PD ➢ Diffuse or generalized field defect
Focal defect
Compare total & pattern deviation HumphreyTM
HumphreyTM
Generalized defect
Compare total & pattern deviation
34
12 HumphreyTM
1) Parameters 2) Reliability 3) Age Corrected 4) Tests
■ Outside normal limits ➢if sensitivities in > 1 of the
5 zones in upper half of the field are different (p<0.01) from those in the corresponding lower half zones
4.Tests: glaucoma hemifield test (GHT) HumphreyTM
34 5
12 HumphreyTM
1) Parameters 2) Reliability 3) Age Corrected 4) Tests 5) Indices
5.Indices (global)
▪ MD: mean deviation ▪ PSD: pattern standard deviation ▪ SF: short-term fluctuation ▪ CPSD: corrected PSD
HumphreyTM
Mean deviation (MD)
▪ Average difference between overall sensitivity of patient and age-matched controls
▪ Indication of generalized defects or elevation (+ or - 2 dB normal)
▪ Good measure of diffuse defects
5.Indices (global) HumphreyTMMean deviation (MD)
40
0
30
20
10
90 60 30 0 30 60 90
Normal hill of vision (age corrected)
dB
Pattern standard deviation (PSD) shape of VF departs from normal age-
corrected field
▪ Focal / localized defects ▪Single most useful analysis ▪Beginning VF loss appear earlier in
probability plots vs grayscale ▪Normal value : 0 to 6 dB
Short term fluctuations (SF)
▪ 0-2dB normal ▪ Average between 2 determinations should be:
➢ < 2dB in normal field ➢ < 3dB in early damage ➢ < 4dB in moderate damage
• Increased fluctuation
▪ Pattern Standard Deviation (PSD) corrected for the SF
▪ Better measure of localized field loss (0-4 dB normal)
Corrected Pattern Standard deviation (CPSD)
HumphreyTM
5. Indices (global)
34 5
12 HumphreyTM
1) Parameters 2) Reliability 3) Age Corrected 4) Tests 5) Indices 6) Correlate
clinically 6
34 5
12 HumphreyTM
1) Parameters 2) Reliability 3) Age Corrected 4) Tests 5) Indices 6) Correlate
clinically 7) Evaluate 67
11) Parameters
OctopusTM
▪ Test strategy ➢ Normal, Dynamic, TOP
▪ Pattern/region used ➢ G1, 32, M2, LVC
▪ Patient details ➢ Date of birth, date of VF, pupil size, test time, VA, correction, eye tested
OctopusTM
1.Parameters
▪ Points positioned in areas of concern in glaucoma ➢Accentuates nasal
step ➢Higher resolution in
paracentral area
G1 program
OS
OctopusTM
1.Parameters - pattern
“Full Threshold”
Normal Strategy
OctopusTM
OctopusTM
➢excellent correlation w/ normal strategy
▪ Dynamic ▪ TOP
Shorter strategies:
Perimetry Programs■ Dynamic Program 30-2 (Octopus)
■ ~ 7 minutes per eye ■ Stimulus presentation adapted to
measured threshold value ■ Higher sensitivity ! smaller steps (2 dB) ■ Lower sensitivity ! larger steps (6-10 dB)
■ Single crossover ■ Light stimulus size is standard (Goldmann
Size III)
Perimetry Programs■ Tendency Oriented Perimetry (TOP)
Program 30-2 ■ ~ 2-3 minutes per eye ■ Screening ■ Only 1 test question per location ■ Single answer influences the value of 8
neighboring points ■ Light stimulus size is standard (Goldmann
Size III) ■ Phase 1 only ■ No SF (short term fluctuation)
G1 vs 32 pattern
OctopusTM
▪ For detection and/or f/up of defects in the central 100
➢ Neurological ➢ Macular ➢ Peri-macular
M2 program
00 100
OctopusTM
1.Parameters - pattern
M2 program (central 100)
OctopusTM
▪ Tests sensitivity in central foveal area ➢Same grid as 32
program ➢End stage glaucoma ➢Goldmann stimulus V
LVC program
00 300
1.Parameters - pattern OctopusTM
LVC program
OctopusTM
2. Reliability Factor
▪ Ideally < 15 ▪ Lower the better
OctopusTM
1
23
OctopusTM
1) Parameters 2) Reliability 3) Age Corrected
Zero in on the probability plots
OctopusTM
Compare C & CC probability plots
3.Age Corrected plots
OctopusTM
4.Tests: Bebie curve
▪ Quickly assesses defect characteristics & depth
▪ Diffuse vs focal defect ➢ Diffuse: curve below & parallel to the
normal curve ➢ Focal: steep fall-offs on the right side
of the curve
OctopusTM
4.Tests: Bebie curve
Diffuse defect: curve below & parallel to normal curve
OctopusTM
4.Tests: Bebie curve
Focal defect: steep fall-offs
4.Tests: Bebie curve OctopusTM
OctopusTM
5. Indices (global)
mean sensitivity (MS)mean deviation (MD) mean defect (MD)pattern std deviation (PSD) loss variance (LV)short term fluctuations (SF)
short term fluctuations (SF)
corrected pattern standard deviation (CPSD)
corrected loss variance (CLV)
OctopusTM HumphreyTM
5.Indices (global)
Visual Field Indices Normal Values
■ Mean Defect ( -2.0 to +2.0 db )
■ Loss Variance ( 0 to 6.0 db )
■ Short-term Fluctuation ( 0 to 2.0 db )
■ Corrected Loss Variance ( 0 to 4.0 db )
1
23
4
56
OctopusTM
1) Parameters 2) Reliability 3) Age Corrected 4) Tests 5) Indices 6) Correlate
clinically
1
23
4
567
OctopusTM
1) Parameters 2) Reliability 3) Age Corrected 4) Tests 5) Indices 6) Correlate
clinically 7) Evaluate
Is the field defect glaucomatous?
• Is the defect focal?
• Is the defect diffuse?
STEP 1
Glaucoma defects are Focal in nature
Diffuse Focal
What kind of a defect is this? diffuse or focal?
combined diffuse & focal defect
If the defect is Focal
STEP 2:
Is the focal defect glaucomatous?
Glaucomatous Visual Field Defects (Seagig Glaucoma Guidelines ‘08)
▪ Asymmetrical across horizontal meridian* ▪ Are located in mid-periphery* (5–250
from fixation) ▪ Reproducible ▪ Not attributable to other pathology ▪ Clustered in neighboring test pts (localised) ▪ Correlate with optic disc and RNFL
* Applicable to early/moderate cases
Localized patterns of glaucoma VF defects
▪ Nasal step (earliest)
▪ Paracentral scotoma
▪ Arcuate (Bjerrum) scotoma ➢ Later becoming altitudinal
▪Temporal island
▪ Central island
Superior nasal step
Inferior paracentral scotoma
Arcuate (Bjerrum) scotoma
Superior altitudinal w/ inferior arcuate scotoma
Reproducibilty■ A visual field defect must be real. To be real, it
must be confirmed on repeated exams
1. Anderson DR, Patella VM. Automated Static Perimetry. 2nd Ed. St Louis: Mosby 1999
2. Hodapp E, Parrish RK, Anderson DR. Clinical decisions in glaucoma. St Louis: Mosby
▪ What is the minimum criteria for a defect to be possibly glaucoma?1
▪ When do you classify a glaucoma defects as:2 ➢ Early? ➢ Moderate? ➢ Severe?
Identification & Classification of a glaucoma defect
Minimum Criteria for glaucoma defects (1)
▪ ≥ 3 non-edge points w/ p< 5% ▪One point w/ p< 1% ▪Cluster in arcuate area
Anderson DR, Patella VM. Automated Static Perimetry. 2nd Ed. St Louis: Mosby 1999
Pattern deviation plot
Criteria for glaucoma defects (2)
CPSD or PSD depressed, with p < 5%
Anderson DR, Patella VM. Automated Static Perimetry. 2nd Ed. St Louis: Mosby,1999
Criteria for glaucoma defects (3)
Abnormal GHT
Anderson DR, Patella VM. Automated Static Perimetry. 2nd Ed. St Louis: Mosby 1999
3 minimum criteria for glaucoma defects
2) CPSD or PSD depressed w/ p < 5%
3) Abnormal GHTAnderson DR, Patella VM. Automated Static Perimetry. 2nd Ed. St Louis: Mosby 1999
1) PD plot a) ≥ 3 non-edge points w/
p< 5% b) 1 point w/ p < 1% c) Cluster in arcuate area
Hodapp E, Parrish RK, Anderson DR. Clinical decisions in glaucoma. St Louis: Mosby
Criteria for Early Glaucoma Defect
▪ MD < -6 dB
▪ On PD plot, < 25% (18 pts) below 5% level and < 15% (10 pts) below 1% level
▪ No pt w/in central 50 : sensitivity < 15 dB
Early Glaucoma Defect
▪ MD > -6 dB but < -12 dB
▪ PD plot, < 50% (37 pts) < 5% level and < 25% (20 pts) < 1% level
▪ No absolute deficit (0 dB) in the central 50
▪ Only 1 hemi-field has point w/ sensitivity < 15 dB in the central 50
Hodapp E, Parrish RK, Anderson DR. Clinical decisions in glaucoma. St Louis: Mosby
Criteria for Moderate Glaucoma Defect
Moderate Glaucoma Defect
▪ MD > -12 dB
▪ On PD plot ➢> 50% of pts < 5% level ➢> 25% of pts < 1% level
▪ Absolute deficit (0 dB) in the central 50
▪ Both hemi-fields w/ pt(s) w/ sensitivity < 15 dB w/in th central 50
Hodapp E, Parrish RK, Anderson DR. Clinical decisions in glaucoma. St Louis: Mosby
Criteria for Severe Glaucoma Defect
Severe Glaucoma Defect
Detecting Progression
➢ Widening or deepening of an existing scotoma
➢ Development of a new glaucomatous scotoma
➢ Occasionally generalized field depression (although usually caused by media opacity or miosis)
Asia Pacific Glaucoma Guidelines (2003-2004)
■ Requires a series of at least 3 or 4 fields
■ Basing judgements on only 1 progressed field is very risky unless the changes encountered are ➢ Very large and/or ➢ Confirmed by other clinical findings, such as
changes in optic disc configuration
Detecting Progression
Octopus
▪ Series Program ➢3 examinations arranged in one
printout ▪ PeriTrend® Statistical Software ▪ EyeSuite®
Detecting Progression
Octopus: Series Program
Detecting Progression
▪ Calculates regression curves of MD (mean defect) and LV (loss variance)
▪ Color-coded curves to show changes: ➢red – depressed ➢green – improved ➢blue – trend isn’t significant/stable
Octopus: PeriTrend®Detecting Progression
Octopus: PeriTrend®
Detecting Progression
Humphrey
■ Overview print-out
■ Glaucoma Progression Analysis® (GPA®) software
Detecting Progression
Humphrey: Overview print-out
Detecting Progression
Humphrey: GPA® software
Detecting Progression
Structure-Function Correlation
■ Combined w/ other examinations
■ No isolated interpretations
■ Disc features must match visual field defects (clinical picture takes precedence)
New Perimetry Technologies■ Short Wavelength Automated
Perimetry (SWAP)
➢Blue light stimulus on yellow background (“blue on yellow”)
➢Detects VF loss 3-5 yrs before white on white perimetry1
➢Utilizes the “K” ganglion cells
1. Racette L et al. Ophthalmol Clin North Am. 2003: 16: 227-236
Goldmann size V 440 nm, 1.80
> 500 nm yellow background
• Except for these differences, SWAP is still a basic threshold perimetry test, in w/c std Goldmann stimuli are presented in the conventional way
New Perimetry Technologies
■ Frequency Doubling Technology (FDT) perimeter
➢Motion/flicker perimetry ➢FDT can detect VF loss 4 yrs before
SAP1 ➢Utilizes the “M” ganglion cells/
Magnocellular pathway
1. Johnson CA et al. J Vision. 2002; 2:100a
▪ Functional testing essential: SAP ▪ Know retinal anatomy & its relation to
visual function ▪ Know programs/parameters
➢Stick to a single one for ff-up ▪ Glaucoma defects are focal ▪ Progression is a hallmark of
Glaucoma ▪ CLINICAL CORRELATION
Summary
Although sometimes it is not as easy as it seems
Thank You!
Perimetry Exercises
…1 year after
…1 year after
Early defects may show up in probability plots and not in the grayscale
…1 year after
… 6 mos. after
… 6 mos. after
progressing cataract
• elevated false “+” score • GHF – “abnormally high sensitivity” • “white scotoma” on grayscale • larger defects on the pattern
deviation plots than in the total deviation probability plots
• highly positive mean deviation (MD)
“Trigger happy” field
both a focal and a diffuse defect
….a year after
post cataract surgery
double arcuate scotomas
superior paracentral scotoma
inferior nasal step extending to blind spot
…1 month after
…1 month after
withdrawal of miotic TX
Are the VF defects artifacts?
▪ “Learning effect” ?
▪ Rim effect ?
▪ Ptosis, prominent brows ?
▪ Lack of instructions or supervision ?
▪ Anxiety/fatigue/drowsiness ?
▪ Malingering ?
Learning effect
▪ Depressed sensitivity in mid-periphery 20-300
▪ Less common in shorter algorithms ▪ 10-20% of normal patients don’t
produce normal VF’s on their first test
Rim effect
Lid effect seen on grayscale but not seen on probability plots
Ptosis effect seen on probability plots
same patient after taping upper lid
“Cloverleaf” pattern
• Initial good responses …..then poor •Test begins centered around 4 primary points
• patient misunderstanding, lack of motivation, and/or fatigue
• poor instruction/supervision by technician
• The first visual field IS NOT THE BASELINE.
• “LEARNING CURVE”