Specificity of the program threshold noiseless trend for perimetric progression analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the specificity of the Threshold Noiseless Trend program (TNT), designed to measure progression in visual fields, using four procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A. In 63 eyes with ocular hypertension, whose last examination showed no perimetric or morphological defects, we performed a mean of 7.70 +/- 1.71 follow-up examinations during 2.2 +/- 0.6 years. B. In 81 glaucomatous eyes examined twice with a bracketing strategy (Octopus 1-2-3 perimeter), we calculated mean threshold value and long-term fluctuation. We simulated 12 different visual fields, adding a random component to simulate an equivalent fluctuation of amplitude. C. Seventy-two glaucomatous eyes, with and without progression, were examined 7.76 +/- 1.25 times during 4.88 +/- 1.39 years using the Humphrey-Sita Standard strategy. Visual field tests were randomly disordered and analyzed using TNT. D. 1221 eyes were examined 7.19 +/- 3.5 times during 3.50 +/- 1.45 years (10,407 visual fields) using TOP-G1 program. We detected progression in 204 eyes using TNT. They were re-evaluated after random disordering of visual field tests. RESULTS: The four procedures indicated specificity > or = 95% as from the seventh examination; this reduced to 90% in experiment C with six examinations, and in experiments A and C with five examinations. CONCLUSIONS: The specificity of TNT may be considered to be over 95% with a large number of examinations, and 90-100% with fewer examinations. At least five examinations are required for a basic interpretation of progression, and preferably more than six to guarantee the specificity of the result.

[Diagnostic capability of PULSAR, FDT y HRT-II in glaucoma suspects]. / Capacidad diagnóstica del HRT-II y de las perimetrías TOP, PULSAR y FDT en pacientes sospechosos de sufrir glaucoma.

PURPOSE: To determine the diagnostic capability of PULSAR-T30W, FDT-Threshold-N30 and HRT-II in glaucoma suspects. METHODS: Forty-seven eyes from 47 referred glaucoma suspects (GS) were examined twice with each technique. Cases with TOP-WW-MD>6dB were excluded. Results were compared with those of 70 eyes from 70 normal controls (C). RESULTS: Mean MD value using TOP-WW in the GS group (0.96dB. sd=1.7) was not significantly different from C (0.8dB. sd=1.77) (p>0.05). Disc area in GS group (2.12 mm(2). sd=0.34) was significantly greater than in C (1.97 mm2. sd=0.45) (p<0.01). For 95.7% specificity, PULSAR-sLV showed the highest sensitivity of 30.9% in individual examinations. The highest reproducible sensitivity in the two examinations was obtained using HRT-II maximum contour elevation (23.4%) and reference height (23.4%), and was 14.9% for various indices after correcting for the influence of disc area (cup area, cup/disc area ratio, maximum contour depression and mean RNFL thickness). Reproducible sensitivity of the perimetric indices was: PULSAR-MD=8.5%, PULSAR-sLV=17%, FDT-MD=6.4%, FDT-PSD=4.3%. The association of perimetric and HRT-II indices achieved high sensitivity but low diagnostic reproducibility. CONCLUSIONS: The most effective indices were maximum contour elevation, reference height and PULSAR-sLV, although the inclusion of the optic nerve head assessment in the selection of the GS sample may have favored the HRT-II results.

Capacidad diagnóstica del HRT-II y de las perimetrías TOP, PULSAR y FDT en pacientes sospechosos de sufrir glaucoma / Diagnostic capability of pulsar, FDT y HRT-II in glaucoma suspects

Objetivos: Determinar la capacidad diagnóstica de TOP-32, PULSAR-T30W, FDT-Umbral-N30 y HRT-II en glaucoma de sospecha. Métodos: 47 ojos de 47 sujetos remitidos por sospecha de glaucoma (SG) se examinaron dos veces. Se excluyeron los casos con defecto medio (MD) superior a 6dB en TOP-32. Los resultados se compararon con los obtenidos en 70 sujetos normales control (C). Resultados: No se observaron diferencias significativas entre los valores de MD obtenidos en TOP- 32, en los grupos SG (0,96dB. DE=1,7) y C (0,8dB. DE=1,77) (p>0.05). El área papilar de SG (2,12 mm2. DE=0.34) fue significativamente superior que en C (1,97 mm2. DE=0,45) (p<0,01). Para una especificidad del 95%, la raíz cuadrada de la varianza de pérdida (sLV) de PULSAR presentó la mayor sensibilidad (30,9%) en exámenes individuales. La mayor reproducibilidad diagnóstica se obtuvo con la máxima elevación del contorno de HRT-II (23%) y con el Plano de referencia (23,4%), siendo del 14,9% para varios índices, después de corregir la influencia del tamaño papilar (área de la excavación, cocientes de área excavación/papila, máxima depresión del contorno y espesor de la capa de fibras). La reproducibilidad de los índices perimétricos fue: PULSAR-MD=8,5%, PULSARsLV= 17%, FDT-MD=6,4%, FDT-PDT=4,3%. La asociación entre índices perimétricos y HRT-II elevó la sensibilidad pero redujo la reproducibilidad diagnóstica. Conclusiones: Los índices de mayor eficacia fueron la máxima elevación del contorno, el plano de referencia y PULSAR-sLV, aunque la inclusión del aspecto papilar en la selección del grupo SG favoreció los resultados de HRT-II

Purpose: To determine the diagnostic capability of PULSAR-T30W, FDT-Threshold-N30 and HRT-II in glaucoma suspects. Methods: Forty-seven eyes from 47 referred glaucoma suspects (GS) were examined twice with each technique. Cases with TOP-WW-MD>6dB were excluded. Results were compared with those of 70 eyes from 70 normal controls (C). Results: Mean MD value using TOP-WW in the GS group (0.96dB. sd=1.7) was not significantly different from C (0.8dB. sd=1.77) (p>0.05). Disc area in GS group (2.12 mm2. sd=0.34) was significantly greater than in C (1.97 mm2. sd=0.45) (p<0.01). For 95.7% specificity, PULSAR-sLV showed the highest sensitivity of 30.9% in individual examinations. The highest reproducible sensitivity in the two examinations was obtained using HRT-II maximum contour elevation (23.4%) and reference height (23.4%), and was 14.9% for various indices after correcting for the influence of disc area (cup area, cup/disc area ratio, maximum contour depression and mean RNFL thickness). Reproducible sensitivity of the perimetric indices was: PULSARMD= 8.5%, PULSAR-sLV=17%, FDT-MD=6.4%, FDT-PSD=4.3%. The association of perimetric and HRT-II indices achieved high sensitivity but low diagnostic reproducibility. Conclusions: The most effective indices were maximum contour elevation, reference height and PULSAR-sLV, although the inclusion of the optic nerve head assessment in the selection of the GS sample may have favored the HRT-II results (AU)