Comparison of 10-2 and 24-2C Test Grids for Identifying Central Visual Field Defects in Glaucoma and Suspect Patients

Ophthalmology. 2021 Oct;128(10):1405-1416. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2021.03.014. Epub 2021 Mar 17.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the ability of 24-2C and 10-2 test grids in measuring visual field global indices, identifying central visual field defects, and facilitating macular structure-function analysis with OCT scans in glaucoma and glaucoma suspect patients.

Design: Prospective, cross-sectional study.

Participants: One eye from 131 glaucoma and 57 glaucoma suspect patients recruited from a referral-only, university-based glaucoma clinic.

Methods: Each subject underwent perimetric testing using 24-2C SITA-Faster and 10-2 SITA-Fast in random order, and Cirrus OCT macular imaging (Ganglion Cell Analysis) for structure-function correlations.

Main outcome measures: Visual field global indices (mean deviation, pattern standard deviation, binarized "cluster" pass/fail, and central mean sensitivity), number and proportion of visual field defects, and structure-function concordance with the Cirrus OCT deviation map following visual field location displacement for correspondence with underlying retinal ganglion cell position.

Results: Global indices (mean deviation, pattern standard deviation, and central mean sensitivity) were similar between both grids. The 10-2 detected more defects compared with the 24-2C (P < 0.0001 for all patients, P = 0.006 for glaucoma patients). This was preserved when analyzing the proportion of defects in the central visual field for all patients (P = 0.02) but was not significantly different for glaucoma patients (P = 0.051). The 10-2 identified more central "clusters" of 2+ contiguous points of deficit (P < 0.0001). Structure-function comparisons performed at locations where visual field and OCT test locations were colocalized revealed greater concordance of structural and functional deficits using the 10-2 (P < 0.0001). The 10-2 took a median of 201 seconds, and the 24-2C took a median of 154 seconds, corresponding to the different thresholding algorithms.

Conclusions: The 24-2C and 10-2 test grids return similar global indices of visual field performance and proportionally similar amounts of central visual field loss. The additional points in the 10-2 grid return more "clusters" of defects and a greater rate of structure-function concordance compared with the 24-2C test grid. Thus, the 24-2C can identify the presence of a clustered central visual field defect using similar probability criteria, whereas the 10-2 may be more useful in comprehensively characterizing the defect and predicting central visual function.

Keywords: Ganglion cell analysis; Humphrey Field Analyzer; Macula; Psychophysics; SITA; SITA Fast; SITA-Faster; Static automated perimetry; Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm; Thresholding.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Algorithms*
  • Cross-Sectional Studies
  • Female
  • Glaucoma / complications*
  • Glaucoma / physiopathology
  • Humans
  • Intraocular Pressure / physiology
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Prospective Studies
  • Retinal Ganglion Cells / pathology*
  • Scotoma / diagnosis
  • Scotoma / etiology*
  • Scotoma / physiopathology
  • Visual Field Tests / methods*
  • Visual Fields / physiology*