Aims To explore the correlation of local macular ganglion cell/inner plexiform layer (GC/IPL) thickness measurements with sensitivity at individual test locations on the central 10-2 visual fields (VFs) in patients with glaucoma.
Methods One hundred thirty-seven eyes of 125 patients with spectral domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) and 10-2 VFs were included. The exported thickness matrices (200×200) of GC/IPL measurements were centred on the fovea. Total deviation values at each test location were correlated with the 20 000 GC/IPL thickness measurements in the corresponding inferior or superior hemiretina, and areas of highest correlation were plotted. Macular structure–function relationships were also examined between six wedge-shaped GC/IPL sectors and the corresponding VF clusters. A multivariate model was built to identify the 10-2 VF test locations associated with each GC/IPL sector thickness.
Results Average mean deviation on 10-2 VFs was −9.2±6.1 dB. The 10-2 VF test points demonstrated correlations with GC/IPL thickness in localised arcuate patterns mostly limited within the central 4.8×4.0 mm measurement ellipse (ρ=0.43–0.74, p<0.05 for all). Twenty-one test points of the 10-2 VF were the best predictors of sectoral GC/IPL thickness. Sectoral VF-OCT correlations were high (ρ=0.53–0.66, p<0.001) and did not significantly change after adjusting for retinal GC displacement (p>0.05).
Conclusions Macular OCT/VF relationships have localised arcuate characteristics in the central region of the macula. Given the overlapping nature of structure–function relationships, a smaller number of VF test locations may be used to summarise macular functional damage.
Trial registration number NCT01742819.
- Field of vision
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Contributors JWL designed the study, acquired, analysed and interpreted data, drafted and revised the paper. EM analysed, interpreted data, drafted and revised the paper. NA analysed, interpreted data and revised the paper. FY analysed, interpreted data and revised the paper. AAA analysed, interpreted data and revised the paper. ALC analysed, interpreted data and revised the paper. JC analysed, interpreted data and revised the paper. KNM designed the study, acquired, analysed and interpreted data, drafted and revised the paper. All authors approved the final version of the paper to be published. All authors agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Funding This study was supported by an NIH Mentored Patient-oriented Research Career Development Award (K23EY022659, KNM) and an unrestricted departmental grant from Research to Prevent Blindness.
Competing interests KNM has non-financial support from Heidelberg Engineering, personal fees from New World Medical, personal fees from Allergan, outside the submitted work.
Patient consent Obtained.
Ethics approval Approved by the Institutional Review Board at University of California Los Angeles.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.