Rates of visual field progression in clinical glaucoma care

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate rates of visual field progression and factors associated with progression rate in open‐angle glaucoma in clinical glaucoma care. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients with manifest primary open‐angle glaucoma (POAG) and pseudoexfoliation glaucoma (PEXG) followed ≥ 5 years with ≥5 SITA Standard fields. Exclusion criteria were minimal. Demographics, intraocular pressure values (IOP), treatment and treatment changes, and visual field (VF) data were recorded. VF progression rates were calculated as slopes of mean deviation (MD) over time. Results: Five hundred and eighty‐three patients were eligible. Three hundred and sixty‐seven (62%) had POAG and 221 (38%) PEXG. Median MD at study start was −10.0 dB. Mean follow‐up time was 7.8 years (SD ± 1.2); mean number of VF tests was 8.9 (SD ± 2.8). Progression rates varied very much among patients with a mean of −0.80 dB/year (SD ± 0.82; median rate, −0.62), and 5.6% of patients progressed at rates worse than −2.5 dB per year A negative slope of MD values was observed in 89% of patients. Mean IOP of all visits decreased over the study period from 20.15 to 18.10 mmHg. Higher age and mean IOP, and more intensive treatment were associated with more rapid progression, while PEXG and IOP variation were not, if treatment intensity was taken into account. Conclusion: Rates of visual field progression in manifest glaucoma with field loss in ordinary clinical care were highly variable. Progression rates rapid enough to influence quality of life were common.

Shown for reading. Its publisher allows quoting it, not republishing it.

References 35

1. 1.

   Ahrlich KD, de Moraes CG, Teng CC, Prata TS, Tello C, Ritch R, Liebmann JM. Visual field progression differences between normal-tension and exfoliative high-tension glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2010;51:1458-1463.

   Not in our library10.1167/iovs.09-3806

2. 2.

   Anderson DR, Drance SM, Schulzer M. Natural history of normal-tension glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:247-253.

   Not in our library10.1016/s0161-6420(00)00518-2

3. 3.

   Bengtsson B, Olsson J, Heijl A, Rootzen H. A new generation of algorithms for computerized threshold perimetry, SITA. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 1997;75:368-375.

   Not in our library10.1111/j.1600-0420.1997.tb00392.x

4. 4.

   Bengtsson B, Leske MC, Hyman L, Heijl A. Fluctuation of intraocular pressure and glaucoma progression in the early manifest glaucoma trial. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:205-209.

   Not in our library10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.07.060

5. 5.

   Caprioli J, Coleman AL. Intraocular pressure fluctuation a risk factor for visual field progression at low intraocular pressures in the advanced glaucoma intervention study. Ophthalmology. 2008;115:1123-1129 e1123.

   Not in our library10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.10.031

6. 6.

   Chauhan BC, Mikelberg FS, Balaszi AG, LeBlanc RP, Lesk MR, Trope GE. Canadian Glaucoma Study: 2. risk factors for the progression of open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126:1030-1036.

   Not in our library10.1001/archopht.126.8.1030

7. 7.

   Chauhan BC, Mikelberg FS, Artes PH, Balazsi AG, LeBlanc RP, Lesk MR, Nicolela MT, Trope GE. Canadian glaucoma study: 3. Impact of risk factors and intraocular pressure reduction on the rates of visual field change. Arch Ophthalmol. 2010;128:1249-1255.

   Not in our library10.1001/archophthalmol.2010.196

8. 8.

   The effectiveness of intraocular pressure reduction in the treatment of normal-tension glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 1998;126:498-505.

   Not in our library10.1016/s0002-9394(98)00272-4

9. 9.

   De Moraes CG, Juthani VJ, Liebmann JM, Teng CC, Tello C, Susanna R, Ritch R. Risk factors for visual field progression in treated glaucoma patients. Arch Ophthalmol. 2011;129:562-568.

   Not in our library10.1001/archophthalmol.2011.72

10. 10.

    Eid TM, Spaeth GL, Bitterman A, Steinmann WC. Rate and amount of visual loss in 102 patients with open-angle glaucoma followed up for at least 15 years. Ophthalmology. 2003;110:900-907.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0161-6420(03)00076-9

11. 11.

    Terminology and guidelines for glaucoma. 2008.

    Not in our library

12. 12.

    Forchheimer I, de Moraes CG, Teng CC, Folgar F, Tello C, Ritch R, Liebmann JM. Baseline mean deviation and rates of visual field change in treated glaucoma patients. Eye. 2011;25:626-632.

    Not in our library10.1038/eye.2011.33

13. 13.

    Gliklich RE, Steinmann WC, Spaeth GL. Visual field change in low-tension glaucoma over a five-year follow-up. Ophthalmology. 1989;96:316-320.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0161-6420(89)33070-3

14. 14.

    Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD, et al. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120:714-720.

    Not in our library10.1001/archopht.120.6.714

15. 15.

    Grødum K, Heijl A, Bengtsson B. A comparison of glaucoma patients identified through mass screening and in routine clinical practice. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2002;805:627-631.

    Not in our library10.1034/j.1600-0420.2002.800613.x

16. 16.

    Heijl A, Bengtsson B, Patella VM. Glaucoma follow-up when converting from long to short perimetric threshold tests. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000;118:489-493.

    Not in our library10.1001/archopht.118.4.489

17. 17.

    Heijl A, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Leske MC. Natural history of open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2009;116:2271-2276.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.06.042

18. 18.

    Heijl A, Alm A, Bengtsson B, Bergström A, Calissendorff B, Lindblom B, Lindén C. Riktlinjer för glaukomsjukvården. 2010.

    Not in our library

19. 19.

    Kobelt-Nguyen G, Gerdtham UG, Alm A. Costs of treating primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension: a retrospective, observational two-year chart review of newly diagnosed patients in Sweden and the United States. J Glaucoma. 1998;7:95-104.

    Not in our library

20. 20.

    Leske MC, Heijl A, Hyman L, Bengtsson B. Early Manifest Glaucoma Trial: design and baseline data. Ophthalmology. 1999;106:2144-2153.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0161-6420(99)90497-9

21. 21.

    Leske MC, Heijl A, Hussein M, Bengtsson B, Hyman L, Komaroff E. Factors for glaucoma progression and the effect of treatment: the early manifest glaucoma trial. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003;121:48-56.

    Not in our library10.1001/archopht.121.1.48

22. 22.

    Leske MC, Heijl A, Hyman L, Bengtsson B, Dong L, Yang Z. Predictors of long-term progression in the early manifest glaucoma trial. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:1965-1972.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.03.016

23. 23.

    Lichter PR, Musch DC, Gillespie BW, Guire KE, Janz NK, Wren PA, Mills RP. Interim clinical outcomes in the Collaborative Initial Glaucoma Treatment Study comparing initial treatment randomized to medications or surgery. Ophthalmology. 2001;108:1943-1953.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0161-6420(01)00873-9

24. 24.

    Lindblom B, Nordmann JP, Sellem E, et al. A multicentre, retrospective study of resource utilization and costs associated with glaucoma management in France and Sweden. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2006;84:74-83.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1600-0420.2005.00560.x

25. 25.

    Membrey WL, Poinoosawmy DP, Bunce C, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA. Comparison of visual field progression in patients with normal pressure glaucoma between eyes with and without visual field loss that threatens fixation. Br J Ophthalmol. 2000;84:1154-1158.

    Not in our library10.1136/bjo.84.10.1154

26. 26.

    Miglior S, Pfeiffer N, Torri V, Zeyen T, Cunha-Vaz J, Adamsons I. Predictive factors for open-angle glaucoma among patients with ocular hypertension in the European Glaucoma Prevention Study. Ophthalmology. 2007;114:3-9.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ophtha.2006.05.075

27. 27.

    Mills RP, Budenz DL, Lee PP, Noecker RJ, Walt JG, Siegartel LR, Evans SJ, Doyle JJ. Categorizing the stage of glaucoma from pre-diagnosis to end-stage disease. Am J Ophthalmol. 2006;141:24-30.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ajo.2005.07.044

28. 28.

    Nouri-Mahdavi K, Hoffman D, Coleman AL, Liu G, Li G, Gaasterland D, Caprioli J. Predictive factors for glaucomatous visual field progression in the Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study. Ophthalmology. 2004;111:1627-1635.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.02.017

29. 29.

    Oostenbrink JB, Rutten-van Molken MP, Sluyter-Opdenoordt TS. Resource use and costs of patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension: a one-year study based on retrospective chart review in the Netherlands. J Glaucoma. 2001;10:184-191.

    Not in our library10.1097/00061198-200106000-00007

30. 30.

    Ritch R. Exfoliation syndrome. Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2001;12:124-130.

    Not in our library10.1097/00055735-200104000-00008

31. 31.

    Ritch R, Schlotzer-Schrehardt U. Exfoliation syndrome. Surv Ophthalmol. 2001;45:265-315.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0039-6257(00)00196-x

32. 32.

    Singh K, Shrivastava A. Intraocular pressure fluctuations: how much do they matter? Curr Opin Ophthalmol. 2009;20:84-87.

    Not in our library10.1097/icu.0b013e328324e6c4

33. 33.

    The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS): 7. The relationship between control of intraocular pressure and visual field deterioration. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;130:429-440.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0002-9394(00)00538-9

34. 34.

    The Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS): 12. Baseline risk factors for sustained loss of visual field and visual acuity in patients with advanced glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 2002;134:499-512.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0002-9394(02)01659-8

35. 35.

    Zahari M, Mukesh BN, Rait JL, Taylor HR, McCarty CA. Progression of visual field loss in open angle glaucoma in the Melbourne Visual Impairment Project. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol. 2006;34:20-26.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1442-9071.2006.01142.x

Cited by papers we hold 2

• Neuroprotection of retinal ganglion cells by a novel gene therapy construct that achieves sustained enhancement of brain-derived neurotrophic factor/tropomyosin-related kinase receptor-B signaling · 2018
  No notice
• EVOLUTION THE CONCEPTS OF ROLE OF INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE IN GLAUCOMA PROGRESSION (REVIEW) · 2016
  Not checked

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.