Aims To characterise the association between visual field (VF) defects and myopic macular degeneration (MMD) in highly myopic adults without glaucoma.
Methods Participants (n=106; 181 eyes) with high myopia (HM; spherical equivalent ≤−5.0 D or axial length (AL) ≥26 mm), after excluding glaucoma and glaucoma suspects, from the Singapore Epidemiology of Eye Diseases-HM study were included in this cross-sectional study. Humphrey VF (central 24–2 threshold), cup-disc ratio (CDR) and intraocular pressure (IOP) measurements were performed. Mean deviation (MD) and pattern SD (PSD), VF defects (normal or abnormal; p<0.05 in ≥3 non-edge contiguous locations) and pattern (eg, generalised sensitivity loss) were analysed. MMD presence was diagnosed from fundus photographs. Generalised estimating equations were used for analysing factors (MD, PSD, VF defects, CDR and IOP) associated with MMD.
Results Mean age was 55.4±9.9 years and 51.9% were women (AL=26.7±1.1 mm). MMD eyes had lower MD (−3.8±2.9 dB vs −1.1±1.4 dB) and higher PSD (2.8±1.7 dB vs 1.7±0.6 dB). A higher percentage of MMD eyes (n=48) had abnormal VF (62.5% vs 28.6%; p<0.001) compared with no MMD (n=133 eyes). VF pattern in MMD eyes was significantly different from eyes without MMD (p=0.001) with greater generalised sensitivity loss (53.3% vs 10.5%) and arcuate defects (16.7% vs 10.5%). In multivariate analyses, MD (OR=1.52) and PSD (OR=1.67) were significantly (p=0.003) associated with MMD, but VF defects were not associated with MMD.
Conclusion Highly myopic adults with MMD may have VF loss when compared with highly myopic patients without MMD even in adults without glaucoma.
- diagnostic tests/investigation
- field of vision
Data availability statement
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or available on reasonable request.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
CL and CHS are joint first authors.
Contributors CL and CHS contributed equally to this work. S-MS and CWW contributed to the conception and design of the study. CL, CHS and HMH performed the data analyses. CL and CHS wrote the manuscript. Manuscript revision: RC, YLW, MEN, ST, DQYQ, C-YC, QVH and CS. Final approval of the manuscript: all authors.
Funding This work was supported by National Medical Research Council grant numbers 0796/2003, IRG07nov013, IRG09nov014, STaR/0003/2008, CG/SERI/2010 and CSA-MOH-000151.
Competing interests YLW is an employee of Essilor International, Singapore.
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.