Dataset Information

Characterization of Central Visual Field Loss in End-stage Glaucoma by Unsupervised Artificial Intelligence.

ABSTRACT: Importance:Although the central visual field (VF) in end-stage glaucoma may substantially vary among patients, structure-function studies and quality-of-life assessments are impeded by the lack of appropriate characterization of end-stage VF loss. Objective:To provide a quantitative characterization and classification of central VF loss in end-stage glaucoma. Design, Setting, and Participants:This retrospective cohort study collected data from 5 US glaucoma services from June 1, 1999, through October 1, 2014. A total of 2912 reliable 10-2 VFs of 1103 eyes from 1010 patients measured after end-stage 24-2 VFs with a mean deviation (MD) of -22 dB or less were included in the analysis. Data were analyzed from March 28, 2018, through May 23, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures:Central VF patterns were determined by an artificial intelligence algorithm termed archetypal analysis. Longitudinal analyses were performed to investigate whether the development of central VF defect mostly affects specific vulnerability zones. Results:Among the 1103 patients with the most recent VFs, mean (SD) age was 70.4 (14.3) years; mean (SD) 10-2 MD, -21.5?(5.6) dB. Fourteen central VF patterns were determined, including the most common temporal sparing patterns (304 [27.5%]), followed by mostly nasal loss (280 [25.4%]), hemifield loss (169 [15.3%]), central island (120 [10.9%]), total loss (91 [8.3%]), nearly intact field (56 [5.1%]), inferonasal quadrant sparing (42 [3.8%]), and nearly total loss (41 [3.7%]). Location-specific median total deviation analyses partitioned the central VF into a more vulnerable superonasal zone and a less vulnerable inferotemporal zone. At 1-year and 2-year follow-up, new defects mostly occurred in the more vulnerable zone. Initial encroachments on an intact central VF at follow-up were more likely to be from nasal loss (11 [18.4%]; P?

SUBMITTER: Wang M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6990977 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Characterization of Central Visual Field Loss in End-stage Glaucoma by Unsupervised Artificial Intelligence.

Wang Mengyu M Tichelaar Jorryt J Pasquale Louis R LR Shen Lucy Q LQ Boland Michael V MV Wellik Sarah R SR De Moraes Carlos Gustavo CG Myers Jonathan S JS Ramulu Pradeep P Kwon MiYoung M Saeedi Osamah J OJ Wang Hui H Baniasadi Neda N Li Dian D Bex Peter J PJ Elze Tobias T

JAMA ophthalmology 20200201 2

<h4>Importance</h4>Although the central visual field (VF) in end-stage glaucoma may substantially vary among patients, structure-function studies and quality-of-life assessments are impeded by the lack of appropriate characterization of end-stage VF loss.<h4>Objective</h4>To provide a quantitative characterization and classification of central VF loss in end-stage glaucoma.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>This retrospective cohort study collected data from 5 US glaucoma services from Ju ...[more]

PMID: 31895454

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo quantify the central visual field (VF) loss patterns in glaucoma using artificial intelligence.DesignRetrospective study.ParticipantsVFs of 8712 patients with 13 951 Humphrey 10-2 test results from 13 951 eyes for cross-sectional analyses, and 824 patients with at least 5 reliable 10-2 test results at 6-month intervals or more from 1191 eyes for longitudinal analyses.MethodsTotal deviation values were used to determine the central VF patterns using the most recent 10-2 test results. A 24-2 VF within a 3-month window of the 10-2 tests was used to stage eyes into mild, moderate, or severe functional loss using the Hodapp-Anderson-Parrish scale at baseline. Archetypal analysis was applied to determine the central VF patterns. Cross-validation was performed to determine the optimal number of patterns. Stepwise regression was applied to select the optimal feature combination of global indices, average baseline decomposition coefficients from central VFs archetypes, and other factors to predict central VF mean deviation (MD) slope based on the Bayesian information criterion (BIC).Main outcome measuresThe central VF patterns stratified by severity stage based on 24-2 test results and a model to predict the central VF MD change over time using baseline test results.ResultsFrom cross-sectional analysis, 17 distinct central VF patterns were determined for the 13 951 eyes across the spectrum of disease severity. These central VF patterns could be divided into isolated superior loss, isolated inferior loss, diffuse loss, and other loss patterns. Notably, 4 of the 5 patterns of diffuse VF loss preserved the less vulnerable inferotemporal zone, whereas they lost most of the remaining more vulnerable zone described by the Hood model. Inclusion of coefficients from central VF archetypical patterns strongly improved the prediction of central VF MD slope (BIC decrease, 35; BIC decrease of >6 indicating strong prediction improvement) than using only the global indices of 2 baseline VF results. Eyes with baseline VF results with more superonasal and inferonasal loss were more likely to show worsening MD over time.ConclusionsWe quantified central VF patterns in glaucoma, which were used to improve the prediction of central VF worsening compared with using only global indices.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Primary angle-closure glaucoma is a type of glaucoma associated with a physically obstructed anterior chamber angle. Obstruction of the anterior chamber angle blocks drainage of fluids (aqueous humor) within the eye and may raise intraocular pressure (IOP). Elevated IOP is associated with glaucomatous optic nerve damage and visual field loss. Laser peripheral iridotomy (often just called 'iridotomy') is a procedure to eliminate pupillary block by allowing aqueous humor to pass directly from the posterior to anterior chamber through use of a laser to create a hole in the iris. It is commonly used to treat patients with primary angle-closure glaucoma, patients with primary angle closure (narrow angles and no signs of glaucomatous optic neuropathy), and patients who are primary angle-closure suspects (patients with reversible obstruction). The effectiveness of iridotomy on slowing progression of visual field loss, however, is uncertain. OBJECTIVES:To assess the effects of iridotomy compared with no iridotomy for primary angle-closure glaucoma, primary angle closure, and primary angle-closure suspects. SEARCH METHODS:We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 9) which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register; MEDLINE Ovid; Embase Ovid; PubMed; LILACS; ClinicalTrials.gov; and the ICTRP. The date of the search was 18 October 2017. SELECTION CRITERIA:Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials that compared iridotomy to no iridotomy in primary angle-closure suspects, patients with primary angle closure, or patients with primary angle-closure glaucoma in one or both eyes were eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two authors worked independently to extract data on study characteristics, outcomes for the review, and risk of bias in the included studies. We resolved differences through discussion. MAIN RESULTS:We identified two trials (2502 eyes of 1251 participants) that compared iridotomy to no iridotomy. Both trials recruited primary angle suspects from Asia and randomized one eye of each participant to iridotomy and the other to no iridotomy. Because the full trial reports are not yet available for both trials, no data are available to assess the effectiveness of iridotomy on slowing progression of visual field loss, change in IOP, need for additional surgeries, number of medications needed to control IOP, mean change in best-corrected visual acuity, and quality of life. Based on currently reported data, one trial showed evidence that iridotomy increases angle width at 18 months (by 12.70°, 95% confidence interval (CI) 12.06° to 13.34°, involving 1550 eyes, moderate-certainty evidence) and may be associated with IOP spikes at one hour after treatment (risk ratio 24.00 (95% CI 7.60 to 75.83), involving 1468 eyes, low-certainty evidence). The risk of bias of the two studies was overall unclear due to lack of availability of a full trial report. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:The available studies that directly compared iridotomy to no iridotomy have not yet published full trial reports. At present, we cannot draw reliable conclusions based on randomized controlled trials as to whether iridotomy slows progression of visual field loss at one year compared to no iridotomy. Full publication of the results from the studies may clarify the benefits of iridotomy.

Dataset Information

Characterization of Central Visual Field Loss in End-stage Glaucoma by Unsupervised Artificial Intelligence.

Publications

Characterization of Central Visual Field Loss in End-stage Glaucoma by Unsupervised Artificial Intelligence.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets