Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Analysing the change in contrast sensitivity post-travoprost treatment in primary open-angle glaucoma patients using Spaeth Richman contrast sensitivity test

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To determine the ability of the Internet-based Spaeth/Richman Contrast Sensitivity (SPARCS) in assessing the change in contrast sensitivity (both central and peripheral) post-treatment with travoprost 0.004%.

Design

This is a prospective observational study.

Methods and participants.

Data of 62 eyes (33 patients) undergoing treatment for naïve POAG patients were analysed. Patients were followed up for a period of six months after starting topical travoprost (Travatan 0.004%, Alcon), and the change in central and peripheral CS was studied.

Results

Mean total SPARCS score at baseline was 69 ± 10.99, improved to 74.62 ± 9.50 after 6 months of therapy (p: 0.001) in all the glaucoma severity groups. Mean SPARCS score at baseline in mild glaucoma group was 72.05 ± 9.87, in the moderate glaucoma group, it was 62.23 ± 9.2, and in the severe glaucoma group, it was 59.36 ± 11.65. After 6 months of treatment with travoprost, the CS improved to 76.05 ± 8.36 in mild group, 76.69 ± 8.82 in moderate group and 67.18 ± 11.15 in severe group (p value: 0.014). The percentage change in the CS from baseline showed significant improvement in the superotemporal quadrant at 1 month (p value: 0.032), superonasal quadrant (p value: 0.049), inferotemporal quadrant at 3 months (p value: 0.003) and 6 months (p value: 0.039). Inferonasal quadrant was affected most by glaucoma. A statistically significant correlation was seen between total SPARCS score with MD and PSD. Correlation was also seen between the percentage change in CS and average RNFL thickness at 3 and 6 months.

Conclusion

Both central and peripheral CS improve following IOP reduction with travoprost. Change in the CS has a significant correlation with RNFL thickness and the perimetric indices.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Vrabec JP, Levin LA (2007) The neurobiology of cell death in glaucoma. Eye 21:S11–S14

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bierings RAJM, de Boer MH, Jansonius NM (2018) Visual performance as a function of luminance in glaucoma: the De Vries-Rose, Weber’s, and Ferry-Porter’s Law. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 59:3416–3423

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Shoshani YZ, Harris A, Rusia D, Spaeth GL, Siesky B, Pollack A et al (2011) Contrast sensitivity, ocular blood flow and their potential role in assessing ischaemic retinal disease. Acta Ophthalmol 89:e382–e395

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hu CX, Zangalli C, Hsieh M, Gupta L, Williams AL, Richman J et al (2014) What do patients with glaucoma see? visual symptoms reported by patients with glaucoma. Am J Med Sci 348:403–409

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Gandolfi SA, Cimino L, Sangermani C, Ungaro N, Mora P, Tardini MG (2005) Improvement of spatial contrast sensitivity threshold after surgical reduction of intraocular pressure in unilateral high-tension glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 46:197–201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Evans DW, Hosking SL, Gherghel D, Bartlett JD (2003) Contrast sensitivity improves after brimonidine therapy in primary open angle glaucoma: a case for neuroprotection. Br J Ophthalmol 87:1463–1465

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Pomerance GN, Evans DW (1994) Test-retest reliability of the CSV-1000 contrast test and its relationship to glaucoma therapy. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 35:3357–3361

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Arend O, Harris A, Wolter P, Remky A (2003) Evaluation of retinal haemodynamics and retinal function after application of dorzolamide, timolol and latanoprost in newly diagnosed open-angle glaucoma patients. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 81:474–479

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Evans DW, Bartlett JD, Houde B, Than TP, Shaikh A (2008) Latanoprost-induced stabilization of central visual function in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 24:224–229

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Prum BE Jr, Rosenberg LF, Gedde SJ, Mansberger SL, Stein JD, Moroi SE et al (2016) Primary open-angle glaucoma preferred practice pattern((R)) guidelines. Ophthalmology 123:41–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gemenetzi M, Yang Y, Lotery AJ (2012) Current concepts on primary open-angle glaucoma genetics: a contribution to disease pathophysiology and future treatment. Eye 26(3):355–369

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Henderer JD (2006) Disc damage likelihood scale. Br J Ophthalmol 90:395–396

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Susanna R Jr, Vessani RM (2009) Staging glaucoma patient: why and how? Open Ophthalmol J 3:59–64

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Richman J, Lorenzana LL, Lankaranian D, Dugar J, Mayer JR, Wizov SS et al (2010) Relationships in glaucoma patients between standard vision tests, quality of life, and ability to perform daily activities. Ophthalmic Epidemiol 17:144–151

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Campbell FW, Maffei L (1974) Contrast and spatial frequency. Sci Am 231:106–114

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ross JE, Bron AJ, Clarke DD (1984) Contrast sensitivity and visual disability in chronic simple glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 68:821–827

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Glovinsky Y, Quigley HA, Dunkelberger GR (1991) Retinal ganglion cell loss is size dependent in experimental glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 32:484–491

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Richman J, Zangalli C, Lu L, Wizov SS, Spaeth E, Spaeth GL (2015) The Spaeth/Richman contrast sensitivity test (SPARCS): design, reproducibility and ability to identify patients with glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 99:16–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Seiple W (1991) The clinical utility of spatial contrast sensitivity testing. Duane’s Foundations of Clinical Ophthalmology, Lippincott PA, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  20. Thakur S, Ichhpujani P, Kumar S, Kaur R, Sood S (2018) Assessment of contrast sensitivity by Spaeth Richman contrast sensitivity test and Pelli Robson chart test in patients with varying severity of glaucoma. Eye 32:1392–1400

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Gardiner SK, Swanson WH, Goren D, Mansberger SL, Demirel S (2014) Assessment of the reliability of standard automated perimetry in regions of glaucomatous damage. Ophthalmology 121:1359–1369

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Elliott DB (1987) Contrast sensitivity decline with ageing: a neural or optical phenomenon? Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 7:415–419

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Prata TS, Piassi MV, Melo LAS (2009) Changes in visual function after intraocular pressure reduction using antiglaucoma medications. Eye 23:1081–1085

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Velten IM, Korth M, Horn FK, Budde WM (1999) Temporal contrast sensitivity with peripheral and central stimulation in glaucoma diagnosis. Br J Ophthalmol 83:199

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Bill A, Sperber GO (1990) Control of retinal and choroidal blood flow. Eye 4(Pt 2):319–325

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Pillunat L, Stodtmeister R (1988) Effect of different antiglaucomatous drugs on ocular perfusion pressures. J Ocul Pharmacol 4:231–242

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Gupta L, Cvintal V, Delvadia R, Sun Y, Erdem E, Zangalli C et al (2017) SPARCS and Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity testing in normal controls and patients with cataract. Eye 31:753–761

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Bambo MP, Ferrandez B, Guerri N, Fuertes I, Cameo B et al (2016) Evaluation of contrast sensitivity, chromatic vision, and reading ability in patients with primary open angle glaucoma. J Ophthalmol 2016:6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Cardascia N, Vetrugno M, Trabucco T, Cantatore F, Sborgia C (2003) Effects of travoprost eye drops on intraocular pressure and pulsatile ocular blood flow: a 180-day, randomized, double-masked comparison with latanoprost eye drops in patients with open-angle glaucoma. Curr Ther Res Clin Exp 64:389–400

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Hawkins AS, Szlyk JP, Ardickas Z, Alexander KR, Wilensky JT (2003) Comparison of contrast sensitivity, visual acuity, and humphrey visual field testing in patients with glaucoma. J Glaucoma 12:134–138

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Wilensky JT, Hawkins A (2001) Comparison of contrast sensitivity, visual acuity, and humphrey visual field testing in patients with glaucoma. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 99:213–217

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors have not disclosed any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ophthalmology, Government Medical College and Hospital, Sector-32, Chandigarh, India

    Parul Ichhpujani, Ann Maria Rodrigues & Suresh Kumar

  2. Department of Ophthalmology, Massachusetts Eye and Ear, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

    Rohan Bir Singh

  3. Department of Ophthalmology, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZA, Leiden, Netherlands

    Rohan Bir Singh

Authors
  1. Parul Ichhpujani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ann Maria Rodrigues
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Suresh Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rohan Bir Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Parul Ichhpujani.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have not disclosed any competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 16 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ichhpujani, P., Rodrigues, A.M., Kumar, S. et al. Analysing the change in contrast sensitivity post-travoprost treatment in primary open-angle glaucoma patients using Spaeth Richman contrast sensitivity test. Int Ophthalmol 43, 2037–2047 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-022-02603-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10792-022-02603-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation