Abstract #90688 Published in IGR 21-3

Value of 10-2 Visual Field Testing in Glaucoma Patients with Early 24-2 Visual Field Loss

West ME; Sharpe GP; Hutchison DM; Rafuse PE; Shuba LM; Nicolela MT; Vianna JR; Chauhan BC
Ophthalmology 2021; 128: 545-553

See also comment(s) by Gustavo de Moraes

PURPOSE: To determine whether the 10-2 test of the Humphrey Field Analyzer detected a higher proportion of abnormal visual fields compared with the 24-2 test in the central 10° of patients with early glaucomatous visual field damage. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with open-angle glaucoma and healthy control participants. METHODS: All participants underwent a 24-2 and 10-2 test. Only the 12 central test locations of the 24-2 test were included to analyze equivalent visual field areas. The performance of the 2 tests was compared across 4 pointwise criteria: total deviation (TD) and pattern deviation (PD) analyses at the 5% and 2% levels. Analyses also were conducted for 2 pairs of follow-up tests, each performed 4 months apart. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), (2) sensitivity at identically matched specificity for the 4 criteria, (3) overlap (entire field and by quadrant) of abnormal visual fields with both tests, and (4) repeatability of the findings in 2 subsequent follow-up tests. RESULTS: One eye each of 97 glaucoma patients (median mean deviation, -2.31 dB) and 65 control participants were included in the study. The AUCs for the 24-2 and 10-2 tests were not significantly different for any of the 4 criteria and ranged from 0.88 to 0.93 and from 0.91 to 0.94, respectively. At matched specificity, the sensitivity of the 24-2 test was significantly higher for all criteria except for PD analysis at 5%. In patients with an abnormal field with either test, the overlap varied from 60% to 86% depending on the criterion, whereas by quadrant, concordance ranged from 70% to 87%. Over the follow-up, the repeatability of test results (both 24-2 and 10-2 abnormal, either abnormal, or both normal) was achieved in 55% to 70% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of glaucoma patients with early damage with the 24-2 test, there was little evidence that adding the 10-2 test revealed additional undetected defects in the central visual field. It may be more prudent to reserve 10-2 testing for following up selected patients with higher risk of central visual field progression.

Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Dalhousie University and Nova Scotia Health Authority, Halifax, Canada.

Full article


6.6.2 Automated (Part of: 6 Clinical examination methods > 6.6 Visual field examination and other visual function tests)

Issue 21-3

Change Issue