METHODS: Diurnal variation of intraocular pressure was measured in 202 eyes of suspected open-angle glaucoma patients and 100 control eyes, at 4-hourly intervals for 24 hours (phasing). Based on the phasing results, optic disc changes and visual field defects, the patients were diagnosed as primary open angle glaucoma (POAG), normal tension glaucoma (NTG), ocular hypertension (OHT), or physiologic cup (PC), or still remained as glaucoma suspects due to inconclusive diagnosis. The last group (glaucoma suspects) was then followed up 6-monthly for their eventual outcome.
RESULTS: The highest percentage of suspected glaucoma patients had peak (maximum) readings in the mid-morning (10-11 A.M.) and trough (minimum) readings after midnight (2-3 A.M.); the highest percentage of control group had peak readings in the late evening (6-7 P.M.) and trough readings after midnight (2-3 A.M.). The mean amplitude of variance was 6 mm Hg in suspected glaucoma group and 4 mm Hg in the control group. After 'phasing', 18.8% of the suspected glaucoma patients were diagnosed as POAG, 16.8% as NTG, 5% as OHT, and 28.7% as physiologic cup; 30.9% remained as glaucoma suspects. After 4 years follow-up, 70% of the glaucoma suspects still remained as glaucoma suspects, 6.7% developed NTG and another 6.7% POAG; 16.6% were normal.
CONCLUSIONS: Serial measurement of IOP ( phasing) in a 24-hour period is still needed, in order not to miss the peak and the trough IOP readings in suspected open-angle glaucoma patients, which helps in better management of glaucoma. Among 30.9% of patients who remained as glaucoma suspects after the initial phasing, 13.4% developed NTG/POAG over a period of 4 years.
METHODS: We measured psychophysical contrast thresholds in one eye of 16 control subjects and 19 patients aged 67.8 ± 5.65 and 71.9 ± 7.15, respectively, (mean ± SD). Patients ranged in disease severity from suspects to severe glaucoma. We used the 17-region FDT-perimeter C20-threshold program and a custom 9-region test (R9) with similar visual field coverage. The R9 stimuli scaled their spatial frequencies with eccentricity and were modulated at lower temporal frequencies than C20 and thus did not display a clear spatial frequency-doubling (FD) appearance. Based on the overlapping areas of the stimuli, we transformed the C20 results to 9 measures for direct comparison with R9. We also compared mfVEP-based and psychophysical contrast thresholds in 26 younger (26.6 ± 7.3 y, mean ± SD) and 20 older normal control subjects (66.5 ± 7.3 y) control subjects using the R9 stimuli.
RESULTS: The best intraclass correlations between R9/C20 thresholds were for the central and outer regions: 0.82 ± 0.05 (mean ± SD, p ≤ 0.0001). The areas under receiver operator characteristic plots for C20 and R9 were as high as 0.99 ± 0.012 (mean ± SE). Canonical correlation analysis (CCA) showed significant correlation (r = 0.638, p = 0.029) with 1 dimension of the C20 and R9 data, suggesting that the lower and higher temporal frequency tests probed the same neural mechanism(s). Low signal quality made the contrast-threshold mfVEPs non-viable. The resulting mfVEP thresholds were limited by noise to artificially high contrasts, which unlike the psychophysical versions, were not correlated with age.
CONCLUSION: The lower temporal frequency R9 stimuli had similar diagnostic power to the FDT-C20 stimuli. CCA indicated the both stimuli drove similar neural mechanisms, possibly suggesting no advantage of FD stimuli for mfVEPs. Given that the contrast-threshold mfVEPs were non-viable, we used the present and published results to make recommendations for future mfVEP tests.