An Update to Octopus Perimetry

Detection of Early Glaucomatous Progression With Octopus Cluster Trend Analysis

“…[6][7][8][9][10] The commercially available Octopus software versions (Peritrend, EyeSuite) offer determination of the rate of progression for global mean defect (MD), diffuse defect (DD), local defect, and pointwise linear regression analysis. 11 However, as several core technical features (background luminance, stimulus duration, number and distribution of the test points, and size of the tested central visual field) are different in the Octopus perimeters and Humphrey Field Analyzers, 4,5 experience on progression determined with the Humphrey system cannot be directly applied to Octopus perimetry. Unfortunately, there are no published investigations intended to find evidence about which of these systems might be more advantageous for the follow-up of glaucoma.…”

“…4,11 This distribution made it possible to arrange functionally related test points into individual clusters. [11][12][13][14][15][16] The use of separate clusters allows separate analysis of functional progression for each cluster, based on trend analysis of the cluster MD value. 16 Cluster Trend Analysis (CTA) may be more sensitive to true changes than rate of global MD change or separate evaluation of the cluster's individual test point sensitivity values.…”

“…[17][18][19] It focuses on localized changes that may have minimal influence on global MD, but at the same time it minimizes the influence of background noise and the between-point dispersion. [11][12][13] In addition, as significant improvement and significantly increased long-term fluctuation compared with the data of the software's stable glaucoma reference population are also indicated, 11,16 correct clinical decision making on cluster progression or variability is strongly supported by the software.…”

Clinical Evaluation of a Novel Population-Based Regression Analysis for Detecting Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression

“…For that reason, the 59 test locations of program G 2 were assigned into ten clusters (• ▶ Fig. 1) which build functional entities [22]. The distribution of the test locations and clusters may reflect the anatomical course of nerve fibers in the human retina.…”

“…Die Sensitivität und Spezifität waren für den r-Test 89,7% respektive 92,0%, und für den t-Test 73,1% respektive 93,8%. In der punktweisen linearen Regressionsanalyse war die Spezifität vergleichbar (89,5 versus 92%), hingegen war die Sensitivität deutlich geringer (22,4 versus 89,7%) für ein Signifikanzniveau von p = 0,01. Die Cluster-Trend-Analyse (p = 0,005) zeigte eine deutlich höhere Sensitivität für den r-Test (37,7%) als für den t-Test (14,1%) bei vergleichbarer Spezifität (88,3 versus 93,8%).…”