Repeatability of a Virtual Reality Headset Perimeter in Glaucoma and Ocular Hypertensive Patients.

Purpose: The VisuALL S is an automated, static threshold, virtual reality-based perimeter for mobile evaluation of the visual field. We examined same-day and 3-month repeatability. Methods: Adult participants with a diagnosis of glaucoma or ocular hypertension underwent two VisuALL 24-2 Normal T- Full threshold strategy tests at baseline and one additional exam at 3 months for each eligible eye. Spearman, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and Bland-Altman plots were used to assess the correlation of individual point sensitivities and mean deviation (MD) among three tests. Results: Eighty-eight eyes (44 participants) were included. Average age was 68.1 ± 14.3 years, and 60.7% were male. VisuALL MD was highly correlated between tests (intravisit: r = 0.89, intervisit: r = 0.82; P < 0.001 for both). Bland-Altman analysis showed an average difference in intravisit MD of -0.67 dB (95% confidence interval [CI], -6.04 to 4.71 dB) and -0.15 dB (95% CI, -8.04 to 7.73 dB) for intervisit exams. Eight-five percent of pointwise intravisit ICCs were above 0.75 (range, 0.63 to 0.93), and 65% of pointwise intervisit ICCs were above 0.75 (range, 0.55 to 0.91). Conclusions: VisuALL demonstrated high correlation of MD between tests and good repeatability for individual point sensitivities among three tests in 3 months, except at the points around the blind spot and superiorly. Translational Relevance: The preliminary reproducibility results for VisuALL are encouraging. Its portable design makes it a potentially useful tool for patients with glaucoma, enabling more frequent assessments both at home and in clinical settings.

Comparison of Perimetric Outcomes from a Tablet Perimeter, Smart Visual Function Analyzer, and Humphrey Field Analyzer.

PURPOSE: The tablet-based Melbourne Rapid Fields (MRF) visual field (VF) test and the IMOvifa Smart Visual Function Analyzer (SVFA) are portable perimeters that may allow for at-home monitoring and more frequent testing. We compared tablet and SVFA results with outputs from the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) 24-2 Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm Standard program. DESIGN: Observational cross-sectional study. SUBJECTS: Adult participants with a diagnosis of glaucoma, suspected glaucoma, or ocular hypertension seen in the Massachusetts Eye and Ear glaucoma clinic were enrolled. All participants were reliable and experienced HFA testers. METHODS: Participants were tested with the SVFA and HFA. The study staff also trained participants on the MRF tablet with instructions to take weekly tests at home for 3 months. Visual field results from the 3 devices were compared. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD), reliability parameters, and point sensitivity. RESULTS: Overall, 79 participants (133 eyes) with a mean age of 61 ± 13 years (range, 26-79 years) were included; 59% of the participants were female, and the mean HFA MD was -2.7 ± 3.9 dB. The global indices of MD and PSD did not significantly vary between HFA and the 2 novel devices, except that the tablet VF reported a 0.6 dB higher PSD compared with HFA. However, tablet and SVFA sensitivities significantly differed from those of the HFA at 36 and 39 locations, respectively, out of 52 locations. Relative to HFA, the tablet overestimated light sensitivity in the nasal field while underestimating the temporal field. The SVFA generally underestimated light sensitivity, but its results were more similar to HFA results compared with the tablet. CONCLUSIONS: Although average MD values from the 2 novel devices suggest that they provide similar results to the HFA, point-by-point comparisons highlight notable deviations. Differences in specific point sensitivity values were significant, especially between the tablet and the other 2 devices. These differences may in part be explained by differences in the devices' normative databases as well as how MD is calculated. However, the tablet had substantial differences based on location, indicating that the tablet design itself may be responsible for differences in local sensitivities. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE(S): Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

Visual Field Prediction: Evaluating the Clinical Relevance of Deep Learning Models.

Purpose: Two novel deep learning methods using a convolutional neural network (CNN) and a recurrent neural network (RNN) have recently been developed to forecast future visual fields (VFs). Although the original evaluations of these models focused on overall accuracy, it was not assessed whether they can accurately identify patients with progressive glaucomatous vision loss to aid clinicians in preventing further decline. We evaluated these 2 prediction models for potential biases in overestimating or underestimating VF changes over time. Design: Retrospective observational cohort study. Participants: All available and reliable Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm Standard 24-2 VFs from Massachusetts Eye and Ear Glaucoma Service collected between 1999 and 2020 were extracted. Because of the methods' respective needs, the CNN data set included 54 373 samples from 7472 patients, and the RNN data set included 24 430 samples from 1809 patients. Methods: The CNN and RNN methods were reimplemented. A fivefold cross-validation procedure was performed on each model, and pointwise mean absolute error (PMAE) was used to measure prediction accuracy. Test data were stratified into categories based on the severity of VF progression to investigate the models' performances on predicting worsening cases. The models were additionally compared with a no-change model that uses the baseline VF (for the CNN) and the last-observed VF (for the RNN) for its prediction. Main Outcome Measures: PMAE in predictions. Results: The overall PMAE 95% confidence intervals were 2.21 to 2.24 decibels (dB) for the CNN and 2.56 to 2.61 dB for the RNN, which were close to the original studies' reported values. However, both models exhibited large errors in identifying patients with worsening VFs and often failed to outperform the no-change model. Pointwise mean absolute error values were higher in patients with greater changes in mean sensitivity (for the CNN) and mean total deviation (for the RNN) between baseline and follow-up VFs. Conclusions: Although our evaluation confirms the low overall PMAEs reported in the original studies, our findings also reveal that both models severely underpredict worsening of VF loss. Because the accurate detection and projection of glaucomatous VF decline is crucial in ophthalmic clinical practice, we recommend that this consideration is explicitly taken into account when developing and evaluating future deep learning models.

Acute Angle-Closure Attacks Are Uncommon in Primary Angle-Closure Suspects after Pharmacologic Mydriasis: The Zhongshan Angle-Closure Prevention Trial.

PURPOSE: Angle-closure glaucoma is a major cause of blindness worldwide that carries an excessive risk of severe, bilateral visual impairment. A common concern among clinicians is the precipitation of acute angle-closure (AAC) attacks because of mydriasis. We evaluated the risk of AAC after pharmacologic dilation in Chinese individuals classified as having bilateral primary angle-closure suspects (PACSs). DESIGN: Randomized, interventional, controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 889 patients with bilateral PACSs, aged between 50 and 70 years, were identified through community screening in Guangzhou, China, and enrolled in the study. METHODS: In the Zhongshan Angle-Closure Prevention Trial, bilateral PACSs were treated with laser peripheral iridotomy (LPI) in 1 randomly selected eye, with the fellow eye serving as an untreated control. Over 72 months of follow-up, the participants had their pupils pharmacologically dilated 6 times with 5% phenylephrine and 0.5% tropicamide. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence and risk of post-mydriasis AAC in LPI-treated and untreated, control eyes classified as PACSs. RESULTS: One bilateral AAC attack occurred after mydriasis at the 2-week post-LPI visit. No other AAC events occurred in the LPI-treated eyes. In the untreated eyes, 4 additional attacks occurred: 2 occurred after dilation (1 at 54 months and 1 at 72 months of follow-up) and 2 occurred spontaneously. The risk of post-mydriasis AAC in the untreated eyes was 1 attack in 1587 dilations. The risk of spontaneous AAC in the untreated eyes was 0.44 per 1000 eye-years (95% confidence interval, 0.11-1.77 per 1000 eye-years). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of incident AAC attacks in PACSs was extremely low, even in a higher-risk group that underwent repeated pharmacologic pupillary dilation over 6 years of follow-up. Prophylactic LPI reduced this small but real risk. This trial was registered at ISRCTN.com as ISRCTN45213099.