Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Problems related to diffuse versus localized loss in the perimetry of glaucomatous visual fields

  • Clinical investigations
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The separation of diffuse loss from more localized loss in the glaucomatous visual field is desirable for a number of reasons. In previous papers, the characteristics of several methods and algorithms for distinguishing among normal visual fields and those exhibiting diffuse and localized loss have been described and compared. In particular, a new diffuse loss index has been introduced that serves to decide whether or not a diffuse loss component is present and, if so, helps to estimate the amount. Here the approaches utilized for calculating empiric probability maps (Heijl) and the pattern deviation plots (STATPAC) are compared with results obtained with the diffuse loss index algorithm. Based on 197 Octopus G1 examinations of glaucomatous visual fields, it is shown that both methods produce large differences when compared with the diffuse loss index. For this and other reasons, it is argued that both empiric probability maps and pattern deviation plots may lead the inexperienced clinician to ignore valuable information concerning actual pathology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anonymous (1986) STATPAC user's guide. Allergan-Humphrey, San Leandro, Calif

  2. Bebie H (1990) Computer-assisted evaluation of visual fields. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 228:242–245

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bebie H, Flammer J, Bebie T (1989) The cumulative defect curve: separation of local and diffuse components of visual field damage. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 227:9–12

    Google Scholar 

  4. Caprioli J, Sears M, Miller JM (1987) Patterns of early visual field loss in open angle glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 103:512–517

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cartwright MJ, Anderson DR (1988) Correlation of asymmetric damage with asymmetric intraocular pressure in normal-tension glaucoma (low-tension glaucoma). Arch Ophthalmol 106:898–900

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chauhan BC, Drance SM (1990) The influence of intraocular pressure on visual field damage in patients with normal-tension and high-tension glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 31:2267–2272

    Google Scholar 

  7. Chauhan BC, Drance SM, Douglas GR (1990) The use of visual field indices in detecting changes in the visual field in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 31:512–520

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chauhan BC, Drance SM, Douglas GR, Johnson CA (1989) Visual field damage in normal- and high-tension glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 108:636–642

    Google Scholar 

  9. Crichton A, Drance SM, Douglas GR, Schulzer M (1989) Unequal intra-ocular pressure and its relation to asymmetric visual field defects in low-tension glaucoma. Ophthalmology 96:1312–1314

    Google Scholar 

  10. Dengler-Harles M, Wild JM, Cole MD, O'Neill EC, Crews SJ (1990) The influence of forward light scatter on the visual field indices in glaucoma. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 228:326–331

    Google Scholar 

  11. Feuer WJ, Anderson DR (1989) Static threshold asymmetry in early glaucomatous visual field loss. Ophthalmology 96:1285–1297

    Google Scholar 

  12. Flammer J (1985) Psychophysics in glaucoma. A modified concept of the disease. In: Greve EL, Leydecker W, Raitta C (eds) The Second European Glaucoma Symposium. Junk, The Hague, p 11

    Google Scholar 

  13. Flammer J (1986) The concept of visual field indices. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 224:389–392

    Google Scholar 

  14. Flammer J, Drance SM, Augustiny L, Funkhouser A (1985) Quantification of glaucomatous visual field defects with automated perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 26:176–181

    Google Scholar 

  15. Funkhouser A (1991) A new diffuse loss index for estimating general glaucomatous visual field depression. Doc Ophthalmol 77:57–72

    Google Scholar 

  16. Funkhouser A, Fankhauser F (1991) A comparison of five methods for estimating general glaucomatous visual field depression. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 230:101–106

    Google Scholar 

  17. Funkhouser AT, Kwasniewska S, Fankhauser F (1988) Clinical interest and problems related to the measurement of the blind spot and the pericoecal region by means of programs SAPRO, SAPPAR, and BSPOT. Ophthalmic Surg 19:485–500

    Google Scholar 

  18. Glowazki A, Flammer J (1987) Is there a difference between glaucoma patients with rather localized visual field damage and patients with more diffuse visual field damage? Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser 49:317–320

    Google Scholar 

  19. Haley MJ (1987) The field analyzer primer. Allergan Humphrey, San Leandro, p 133

    Google Scholar 

  20. Heijl A (1989) Lack of diffuse loss of differential light sensitivity in early glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol 67:353–360

    Google Scholar 

  21. Heijl A, Lindgren G, Olsson J (1987) A package for the statistical analysis of visual fields. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser 49:153–168

    Google Scholar 

  22. Heijl A, Lindgren F, Olsson J, Asman P (1989) Visual field interpretation with empiric probability maps. Arch Ophthalmol 107:204–208

    Google Scholar 

  23. Samuelson TW, Spaeth GR (1991) Focal and diffuse glaucomatous visual field defects: their relationship to intraocular pressure. Inv Ophthalmol Vis Sci [Suppl] 32:810

    Google Scholar 

  24. Vo TD, Kim SY, Williams AS (1991) Altitudinal field defect associated with normal tension glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci [Suppl] 32:810

    Google Scholar 

  25. Wood JM, Wild JM, Crews SJ (1987) Induced intraocular light scatter and the sensitivity gradient of the normal visual field. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 225:369–373

    Google Scholar 

  26. Wood JM, Wild JM, Smerdon DL, Crews SJ (1989) Alterations in the shape of the automated perimetric profile arising from cataract. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 227:157–161

    Google Scholar 

  27. Zulauf M, Caprioli J (1992) Fluctuation of the visual field in glaucoma. In: Caprioli J (ed) Contemporary issues in glaucoma. Ophthalmology Clinics of North America Series. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 671–694

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Insel Hospital, University Eye Clinic, CH-3010, Berne, Switzerland

    Arthur T. Funkhouser & Franz Fankhausert

  2. Institute of Gerontology, King's College, University of London, UK

    Robert A. Weale

Authors
  1. Arthur T. Funkhouser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Franz Fankhausert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Robert A. Weale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Offprint requests to: A.T. Funkhouser

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Funkhouser, A.T., Fankhausert, F. & Weale, R.A. Problems related to diffuse versus localized loss in the perimetry of glaucomatous visual fields. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 230, 243–247 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00176298

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00176298

Keywords

Search

Navigation