Examination of the performance of different pointwise linear regression progression criteria to detect glaucomatous visual field change

Background: We aimed to investigate the performance of five different trend analysis criteria for the detection of glaucomatous progression and to determine the most frequently and rapidly progressing locations of the visual field. Design: Retrospective cohort. Participants or Samples: Treated glaucoma patients with =8 Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm (SITA)-standard 24-2 visual field tests. Methods: Progression was determined using trend analysis. Five different criteria were used: (A) =1 significantly progressing point; (B) =2 significantly progressing points; (C) =2 progressing points located in the same hemifield; (D) at least two adjacent progressing points located in the same hemifield; (E) =2 progressing points in the same Garway-Heath map sector. Main Outcome Measures: Number of progressing eyes and false-positive results. Results: We included 587 patients. The number of eyes reaching a progression endpoint using each criterion was: A = 300 (51%); B = 212 (36%); C = 194 (33%); D = 170 (29%); and E = 186 (31%) (P = 0.03). The numbers of eyes with positive slopes were: A = 13 (4.3%); B = 3 (1.4%); C = 3 (1.5%); D = 2 (1.1%); and E = 3 (1.6%) (P = 0.06). The global slopes for progressing eyes were more negative in Groups B, C and D than in Group A (P = 0.004). The visual field locations that progressed more often were those in the nasal field adjacent to the horizontal midline. Conclusions: Pointwise linear regression criteria that take into account the retinal nerve fibre layer anatomy enhances the specificity of trend analysis for the detection glaucomatous visual field progression.

Comparison of the reliability of multifocal visual evoked cortical potentials generated by pattern reversal and pattern pulse stimulation

This study compared the effectiveness of the multifocal visual evoked cortical potentials (mfVEP) elicited by pattern pulse stimulation with that of pattern reversal in producing reliable responses (signal-to-noise ratio >1.359). Participants were 14 healthy subjects. Visual stimulation was obtained using a 60-sector dartboard display consisting of 6 concentric rings presented in either pulse or reversal mode. Each sector, consisting of 16 checks at 99% Michelson contrast and 80 cd/m² mean luminance, was controlled by a binary m-sequence in the time domain. The signal-to-noise ratio was generally larger in the pattern reversal than in the pattern pulse mode. The number of reliable responses was similar in the central sectors for the two stimulation modes. At the periphery, pattern reversal showed a larger number of reliable responses. Pattern pulse stimuli performed similarly to pattern reversal stimuli to generate reliable waveforms in R1 and R2. The advantage of using both protocols to study mfVEP responses is their complementarity: in some patients, reliable waveforms in specific sectors may be obtained with only one of the two methods. The joint analysis of pattern reversal and pattern pulse stimuli increased the rate of reliability for central sectors by 7.14% in R1, 5.35% in R2, 4.76% in R3, 3.57% in R4, 2.97% in R5, and 1.78% in R6. From R1 to R4 the reliability to generate mfVEPs was above 70% when using both protocols. Thus, for a very high reliability and thorough examination of visual performance, it is recommended to use both stimulation protocols.