Agreement in the detection of chiasmal and postchiasmal visual field defects between imo binocular random single-eye test and Humphrey monocular test

• Published in: Japanese journal of ophthalmology Vol. 66; no. 5; pp. 413 - 424
• Main Authors: Sakamoto, Mari, Sawamura, Hiromasa, Aihara, Makoto, Goseki, Toshiaki, Ikeda, Tetsuya, Ishikawa, Hitoshi, Nakamura, Makoto
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Tokyo Springer Japan 01.09.2022; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Binocular vision; Clinical Investigation; Correlation coefficient; Correlation coefficients; Defects; Eye; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Ophthalmology; Quadrants; Sensitivity; Sensitivity analysis; Visual field; Visual fields; HFA; Chiasmal and postchiasmal lesions; Imo; Binocular random single-eye test; Visual field
• ISSN: 0021-5155; 1613-2246
• DOI: 10.1007/s10384-022-00935-y

Purpose To compare the ability of imo binocular random single-eye test (BRSET) to detect visual field (VF) defects due to chiasmal and postchiasmal lesions (C/PCLs) with a Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) monocular test. Study design Prospective multicenter study Methods This study enrolled 40 patients with C/PCLs and measured their VFs using both imo BRSET and HFA monocular test. The VFs were classified into three groups using the cluster criterion: 1) bitemporal group, 2) homonymous group, and 3) others. The agreement and correlation of VF results between imo and HFA were analyzed using the Bland–Altman plot and Spearman correlation coefficient. Results The VFs of 34 patients were analyzed and classified. There were 13 patients in the bitemporal, 6 in the homonymous, and 15 in the others group. BRSET showed a significantly shorter test duration than HFA. The imo systematically yielded a lower sensitivity than HFA. The average sensitivity at each test location correlated well between the perimeters in all groups, with the correlation coefficients ranging from 0.89 to 0.98. Bland–Altman plots showed wider limits of agreement in the affected quadrants compared to the unaffected quadrants in the bitemporal and homonymous groups. The fixation loss rate did not differ between the perimeters, but there were significant differences in the false positive and false negative rates between perimeters. Conclusion BRSET detected VF defects due to C/PCLs as accurately as the HFA monocular test with a shorter test duration.