Evaluating Increment and Decrement Stimuli Responses in Patients with Glaucoma Using Virtual Reality–Based Perimetry

IF 4.6 Q1 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Albert Xu PhD , Allen Khudaverdyan BA , Corinne Shiu BA , Michael Deiner PhD , Murtaza Saifee MD , James J. Blaha , Benjamin T. Backus PhD , Yvonne Ou MD
{"title":"Evaluating Increment and Decrement Stimuli Responses in Patients with Glaucoma Using Virtual Reality–Based Perimetry","authors":"Albert Xu PhD ,&nbsp;Allen Khudaverdyan BA ,&nbsp;Corinne Shiu BA ,&nbsp;Michael Deiner PhD ,&nbsp;Murtaza Saifee MD ,&nbsp;James J. Blaha ,&nbsp;Benjamin T. Backus PhD ,&nbsp;Yvonne Ou MD","doi":"10.1016/j.xops.2025.100929","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To evaluate increment and decrement stimuli responses in glaucoma using a virtual reality–based perimetric system, Vivid Vision Perimetry (VVP) and to compare these findings with conventional perimetry.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>This is a cross-sectional study involving participants with diagnosed perimetric glaucoma, preperimetric glaucoma, and glaucoma suspect or ocular hypertension.</div></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><div>Sixty-nine participants (mean age: 66.9 years; 50.7% female) were recruited from ophthalmology clinics at the University of California, San Francisco, California, United States. Eyes were grouped clinically into perimetric glaucoma (62 eyes), preperimetric glaucoma (31 eyes), and glaucoma suspect or ocular hypertension (41 eyes).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Increment and decrement stimuli were tested at 12 locations per eye using the VVP system.</div></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><div>Contrast sensitivities (CSs) were recorded and mean CS was computed and compared between VVP and conventional perimetry (Humphrey Visual Field [HVF]). Correlations between VVP and HVF results were computed, and statistical analyses were conducted using cluster bootstrapping to account for intereye correlations.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Perimetric glaucoma eyes had stronger correlation of CS between VVP and HVF tests compared to preperimetric glaucoma and glaucoma suspect or ocular hypertension eyes. Across all groups, decrement testing generally showed higher correlations than increment testing (perimetric: 0.48 [increment] vs. 0.61 [decrement]; preperimetric: 0.24 vs. 0.37; glaucoma suspect: 0.35 vs. 0.36). In perimetric glaucoma, particularly in moderate to severe cases, there was a significantly greater CS to decrement stimuli compared to increment stimuli (–1.46 decibels [dB] [95% confidence interval [CI]: –2.59, –0.30]). Preperimetric glaucoma eyes had significantly higher CS to increment stimuli than to decrement stimuli (+0.86 dB [95% CI: 0.11, 1.67]). Throughout all clinical subtypes, areas of the visual field with higher contrast thresholds (lower sensitivity) showed greater sensitivity to increment stimuli, whereas areas with lower contrast thresholds (higher sensitivity) showed greater sensitivity to decrement stimuli (perimetric: m = 0.63, R = 0.71; preperimetric: m = 0.50, R = 0.6; glaucoma suspect: m = 0.45, R = 0.51; all <em>P</em> &lt; 0.01). Additionally, peripheral points generally exhibited lower CS than central points in both increment and decrement testing in all groups (all <em>P</em> &lt; 0.05).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>We found significant differences in how preperimetric and perimetric glaucoma eyes respond to varying stimuli. Preperimetric eyes were better at detecting increment stimuli, while perimetric eyes were better at detecting decrement stimuli. Our results confirm earlier studies reporting greater OFF-pathway vulnerability in early glaucoma but suggest a shift to ON-pathway vulnerability in severe glaucoma.</div></div><div><h3>Financial Disclosure(s)</h3><div>Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74363,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology science","volume":"6 1","pages":"Article 100929"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666914525002271","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate increment and decrement stimuli responses in glaucoma using a virtual reality–based perimetric system, Vivid Vision Perimetry (VVP) and to compare these findings with conventional perimetry.

Design

This is a cross-sectional study involving participants with diagnosed perimetric glaucoma, preperimetric glaucoma, and glaucoma suspect or ocular hypertension.

Participants

Sixty-nine participants (mean age: 66.9 years; 50.7% female) were recruited from ophthalmology clinics at the University of California, San Francisco, California, United States. Eyes were grouped clinically into perimetric glaucoma (62 eyes), preperimetric glaucoma (31 eyes), and glaucoma suspect or ocular hypertension (41 eyes).

Methods

Increment and decrement stimuli were tested at 12 locations per eye using the VVP system.

Main Outcome Measures

Contrast sensitivities (CSs) were recorded and mean CS was computed and compared between VVP and conventional perimetry (Humphrey Visual Field [HVF]). Correlations between VVP and HVF results were computed, and statistical analyses were conducted using cluster bootstrapping to account for intereye correlations.

Results

Perimetric glaucoma eyes had stronger correlation of CS between VVP and HVF tests compared to preperimetric glaucoma and glaucoma suspect or ocular hypertension eyes. Across all groups, decrement testing generally showed higher correlations than increment testing (perimetric: 0.48 [increment] vs. 0.61 [decrement]; preperimetric: 0.24 vs. 0.37; glaucoma suspect: 0.35 vs. 0.36). In perimetric glaucoma, particularly in moderate to severe cases, there was a significantly greater CS to decrement stimuli compared to increment stimuli (–1.46 decibels [dB] [95% confidence interval [CI]: –2.59, –0.30]). Preperimetric glaucoma eyes had significantly higher CS to increment stimuli than to decrement stimuli (+0.86 dB [95% CI: 0.11, 1.67]). Throughout all clinical subtypes, areas of the visual field with higher contrast thresholds (lower sensitivity) showed greater sensitivity to increment stimuli, whereas areas with lower contrast thresholds (higher sensitivity) showed greater sensitivity to decrement stimuli (perimetric: m = 0.63, R = 0.71; preperimetric: m = 0.50, R = 0.6; glaucoma suspect: m = 0.45, R = 0.51; all P < 0.01). Additionally, peripheral points generally exhibited lower CS than central points in both increment and decrement testing in all groups (all P < 0.05).

Conclusions

We found significant differences in how preperimetric and perimetric glaucoma eyes respond to varying stimuli. Preperimetric eyes were better at detecting increment stimuli, while perimetric eyes were better at detecting decrement stimuli. Our results confirm earlier studies reporting greater OFF-pathway vulnerability in early glaucoma but suggest a shift to ON-pathway vulnerability in severe glaucoma.

Financial Disclosure(s)

Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.
使用基于虚拟现实的周边测量技术评估青光眼患者的递增和递减刺激反应
目的应用基于虚拟现实的视周测量系统Vivid Vision Perimetry (VVP)评价青光眼患者的递增和递减刺激反应,并与常规视周测量结果进行比较。设计:这是一项横断面研究,研究对象包括诊断为周围性青光眼、周围性青光眼、疑似青光眼或高眼压患者。参与者:69名参与者(平均年龄:66.9岁,50.7%为女性)从美国加州旧金山加州大学眼科诊所招募。临床分为周围型青光眼(62眼)、周围型青光眼(31眼)和疑似青光眼或高眼压型青光眼(41眼)。方法采用VVP系统对每只眼的12个位置进行增、减刺激测试。主要观察指标记录对比敏感度(CSs),计算VVP与常规视野(Humphrey视野[HVF])的平均CS,并进行比较。计算VVP和HVF结果之间的相关性,并使用聚类bootstrapping进行统计分析以解释眼间相关性。结果与前周青光眼、疑似青光眼或高眼压眼相比,视距测量青光眼VVP和HVF的相关性更强。在所有组中,减量检测通常比递增检测显示出更高的相关性(视周:0.48[递增]对0.61[递减];预视:0.24对0.37;疑似青光眼:0.35对0.36)。在周围性青光眼中,特别是中重度青光眼,减量刺激的CS明显高于增量刺激(-1.46分贝[dB][95%可信区间[CI]: -2.59, -0.30])。视周前青光眼对增量刺激的CS显著高于对递减刺激的CS (+0.86 dB [95% CI: 0.11, 1.67])。在所有临床亚型中,具有较高对比度阈值(低灵敏度)的视野区域对增量刺激表现出更高的敏感性,而具有较低对比度阈值(高灵敏度)的区域对减量刺激表现出更高的敏感性(周边测量:m = 0.63, R = 0.71;预周边测量:m = 0.50, R = 0.6;疑似青光眼:m = 0.45, R = 0.51;所有P <; 0.01)。此外,在所有组的增量和递减试验中,外围点的CS普遍低于中心点(均P <; 0.05)。结论:我们发现围周前青光眼和围周青光眼对不同刺激的反应有显著差异。预视眼对增量刺激的识别能力较强,而视视眼对减量刺激的识别能力较强。我们的结果证实了早期研究报告早期青光眼的off通路易感性更强,但在严重青光眼中转向on通路易感性。财务披露专有或商业披露可在本文末尾的脚注和披露中找到。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ophthalmology science
Ophthalmology science Ophthalmology
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
89 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信