Progression Measurement of Visual Field Loss in Medically Controlled Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma (POAG)

Visual field loss in POAG

Authors

  • Maham Zehra Department of Ophthalmology, Rawal Institute of Health Sciences, Islamabad Pakistan, Department of Ophthalmology
  • Mohd Shakaib Anwar Department of Ophthalmology, Rawal Institute of Health Sciences, Islamabad Pakistan, Department of Ophthalmology
  • Erum Yousafzai Department of Ophthalmology, Rawal Institute of Health Sciences, Islamabad Pakistan, Department of Ophthalmology
  • Waseem Akhter Department of Ophthalmology, Rawal Institute of Health Sciences, Islamabad Pakistan, Department of Ophthalmology
  • Qura -Tul- Ain Armed Forces Institute of Ophthalmology/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan
  • Maeirah Shafique Armed Forces Institute of Ophthalmology/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS) Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51253/pafmj.v73i6.8595

Keywords:

Glaucoma hemifield test, Mean Deviation, Pattern standard deviation, Primary open-angle glaucoma

Abstract

Objective: To determine mean visual field parameters loss (Mean deviation and Pattern standard deviation) and frequency of glaucoma hemifield test to evaluate optic nerve damage progression in medically well-controlled primary open-angle
glaucoma POAG through standard automated perimetry.

Study Design: Prospective longitudinal study.

Place and Duration of Study: Department of Ophthalmology, Rawal Institute of Health Sciences, Islamabad Pajistan, from Sep 2019 to March 2020.

Methodology: Fifty-four patients were inlcuded. Visual field parameters included the Glaucoma hemifield test, Mean
deviation, and Pattern standard deviation. The visual field loss progression was evaluated through Humphry analyzer 30-2.
Follow-up was done on the first day of the presentation, then after three and six months.

Results: We found an increase in intraocular pressure (14.59±1.3 vs 15.87±2.1, p<0.001, 16.44±2.4, p<0.001, Mean deviation (- 9.381±6.5 vs -10.905±8.9, p=0.05, -11.034±9.9=0.05) and Pattern standard deviation (6.158±4.1 vs 6.133±4.3, p<0.001, 6.502±4.2, p<0.001) at 1st day, 3-monthS and 6-monthS respectively. Glaucoma hemifield test was outside normal in 39(72.2%), 45(83.3%), 50(92.6%) patients, borderline in 5(9.3%), 4(7.4%), 2(3.7%) patients, within normal in 6(11.1%), 3(5.6%), 1(1.9%) patient at 1stday, 3-months and 6-months respectively.

Conclusion: Primary open-angle glaucoma patients with medically controlled conditions show an increasing trend in visual
field parameters, including mean standard deviation, pattern standard deviation and glaucoma hemifield test measurement
with the progression of the disease

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Jonas JB, Aung T, Bourne RR, Born MA, Ritch R, Panda-Jonas S,

et al. Glaucoma.Lancet 2017; 390(10108): 2183–2193.

https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(17)31469-1

Tham YC, Li X, Wong YT, Quigley AH, Aung T, Cheng Y-C , et

al. Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma

burden through 2040: A systematic review and metaanalysis. Ophthalmology 2014; 121(11): 2081–2090.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2014.05.013

Khachatryan N, Pistilli M, Maguire GM, Salowe JR, Fertig MR,

Morre T, et al. Primary Open-Angle African American Glaucoma

Genetics (POAAGG) Study: Gender and risk of POAG in African

Americans. PLoS One 2019; 14(8): e0218804.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0218804

Taqi U, Fasih U, Jafri AFS, Sheikh A. Frequency of primary open

angle glaucoma in Abbasi Shaheed Hospital. J Pak Med

Assoc 2011; 61(8): 778-781.

Unterlauft JD, Bohm MRR. Role of the aging visual system in

glaucoma. Ophthalmologe 2017; 114(2): 108–113.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00347-016-0430-6

Marshall LL, Hayslett LR, Stevens AG. Therapy for Open-Angle

Glaucoma. Consult Pharm 2018; 33(8): 432-445.

https://doi.org/10.4140/tcp.n.2018.432

Yousefi S , Sakai H , Murata H , Fujino Y , Matsuura

M , Garway-Heath D ,et al. Rates of Visual Field Loss in Primary

Open-Angle Glaucoma and Primary Angle-Closure Glaucoma:

Asymmetric Patterns. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2018; 59(15):

-5725. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.18-25140

Helbig C, Wollny A , Altiner A , Diener A,Kohlen J, Ritzke M, et

al. Treatment Complexity in Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma

(POAG): Perspectives on Patient Selection in Micro-Invasive

Glaucoma Surgery (MIGS) Using Stents. Klin Monbl

Augenheilkd 2021; 238(3): 302-310.

https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1241-4489

Actis GA,Versino E,Brogliatti B,Rolle T. Risk Factors for Primary

Open Angle Glaucoma (POAG) Progression: A Study Ruled in

Torino. Open Ophthalmol J. 2016; 10(2): 129-139.

https://doi.org/10.2174/1874364101610010129

Naito T,Yoshikawa K,Mizoue S, Nanno M, Kimura T, Suzumura

H, et al. Relationship between progression of visual field defect

and intraocular pressure in primary open-angle glaucoma. Clin

Ophthalmol 2015; 9(3): 1373–1378.

https://doi.org/10.2147/opth.s86450

Harwerth RS, Quigley HA. Visual field defects and retinal

ganglion cell losses in patients with glaucoma.Arch Ophthalmol

; 124(6): 853-859.https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.124.6.853

Tripathy K, Sharma YR, Chawla R, Basu K, Vohra R, Venkatesh

P, et al. Triads in Ophthalmology: A Comprehensive

Review. Semin Ophthalmol 2017; 32(2): 237-250.

https://doi.org/10.3109/08820538.2015.1045150

Sit AJ, Pruet CM. Personalizing Intraocular Pressure: Target

Intraocular Pressure in the Setting of 24-Hour Intraocular

Pressure Monitoring. Asia Pac J Ophthalmol (Phila)v2016 ; 5(1):

-22. https://doi.org/10.1097/apo.0000000000000178

Chen PP , Park JR. Visual field progression in patients with

initially unilateral visual field loss from chronic open-angle

glaucoma. Ophthalmology 2000; 107(9): 1688-1692.

https://doi.org/10.1016/s0161-6420(00)00229-3

Heo WD, Kim NK, Lee WM, Lee BS, Kim SC. Properties of

pattern standard deviation in open-angle glaucoma patients with

hemi-optic neuropathy and bi-optic neuropathy. PLoS One 2017;

(3): e0171960. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171960

Rao HL, Kumar AU, Babu JG, Senthil S, Garudadri CS.

Relationship between severity of visual field loss at presentation

and rate of visual field progression in glaucoma. Ophthalmology

; 118: 249–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.05.027

Lau LI, Liu CJ, Chou JC, Hsu WM, Liu JH.Patterns of visual field

defects in chronic angle-closure glaucoma with different disease

severity.Ophthalmology 2003; 110(1): 1890–1894.

https://doi.org/10.1016/s0161-6420(03)00666-3

Schiefer U, Papageorgiou E, Sample PA, Pascual JP, Selig B,

Krapp E, et al.Spatial pattern of glaucomatous visual field loss

obtained with regionally condensed stimulus arrangements. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2010; 51(1): 5685–5689.

https://doi.org/10.1167%2Fiovs.09-5067

Garway-Heath DF, Poinoosawmy D, Fitzke FW, Hitchings

RA.Mapping the visual field to the optic disc in normal tension

glaucoma eyes.Ophthalmology 2000; 107(1): 1809–1815.

https://doi.org/10.1016/s0161-6420(00)00284-0

Papp A, Kis K, Németh J. Conversion formulas between

automated-perimetry indexes as measured by two different

types of instrument. Ophthalmologica 2001; 215: 87–90.

https://doi.org/10.1159/000050835

Downloads

Published

30-12-2023

Issue

Section

Original Articles

How to Cite

1.
Zehra M, Anwar MS, Yousafzai E, Akhter W, Ain Q-T-, Shafique M. Progression Measurement of Visual Field Loss in Medically Controlled Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma (POAG): Visual field loss in POAG. Pak Armed Forces Med J [Internet]. 2023 Dec. 30 [cited 2024 Jun. 14];73(6):1691-4. Available from: https://pafmj.org/PAFMJ/article/view/8595