Does the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) accurately map visual field loss attributed to vigabatrin?

Miriam L. Conway, Sarah L. Hosking, Haogang Zhu, Robert P. Cubbidge

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Vigabatrin (VGB) is an anti-epileptic medication which has been linked to peripheral constriction of the visual field. Documenting the natural history associated with continued VGB exposure is important when making decisions about the risk and benefits associated with the treatment. Due to its speed the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) has become the algorithm of choice when carrying out Full Threshold automated static perimetry. SITA uses prior distributions of normal and glaucomatous visual field behaviour to estimate threshold sensitivity. As the abnormal model is based on glaucomatous behaviour this algorithm has not been validated for VGB recipients. We aim to assess the clinical utility of the SITA algorithm for accurately mapping VGB attributed field loss. Methods: The sample comprised one randomly selected eye of 16 patients diagnosed with epilepsy, exposed to VGB therapy. A clinical diagnosis of VGB attributed visual field loss was documented in 44% of the group. The mean age was 39.3 years∈±∈14.5 years and the mean deviation was -4.76 dB ±4.34 dB. Each patient was examined with the Full Threshold, SITA Standard and SITA Fast algorithm. Results: SITA Standard was on average approximately twice as fast (7.6 minutes) and SITA Fast approximately 3 times as fast (4.7 minutes) as examinations completed using the Full Threshold algorithm (15.8 minutes). In the clinical environment, the visual field outcome with both SITA algorithms was equivalent to visual field examination using the Full Threshold algorithm in terms of visual inspection of the grey scale plots, defect area and defect severity. Conclusions: Our research shows that both SITA algorithms are able to accurately map visual field loss attributed to VGB. As patients diagnosed with epilepsy are often vulnerable to fatigue, the time saving offered by SITA Fast means that this algorithm has a significant advantage for use with VGB recipients.

LanguageEnglish
Article number166
Number of pages10
JournalBMC Ophthalmology
Volume14
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 23 Dec 2014

Fingerprint

Vigabatrin
Visual Fields
Epilepsy

Bibliographical note

© 2014 Conway et al.; licensee BioMed Central.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Keywords

  • Swedish interactive threshold algorithm
  • Vigabatrin
  • visual field

Cite this

@article{dfe799e0f5964434b5c0ba0faa24e226,
title = "Does the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) accurately map visual field loss attributed to vigabatrin?",
abstract = "Background: Vigabatrin (VGB) is an anti-epileptic medication which has been linked to peripheral constriction of the visual field. Documenting the natural history associated with continued VGB exposure is important when making decisions about the risk and benefits associated with the treatment. Due to its speed the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) has become the algorithm of choice when carrying out Full Threshold automated static perimetry. SITA uses prior distributions of normal and glaucomatous visual field behaviour to estimate threshold sensitivity. As the abnormal model is based on glaucomatous behaviour this algorithm has not been validated for VGB recipients. We aim to assess the clinical utility of the SITA algorithm for accurately mapping VGB attributed field loss. Methods: The sample comprised one randomly selected eye of 16 patients diagnosed with epilepsy, exposed to VGB therapy. A clinical diagnosis of VGB attributed visual field loss was documented in 44{\%} of the group. The mean age was 39.3 years∈±∈14.5 years and the mean deviation was -4.76 dB ±4.34 dB. Each patient was examined with the Full Threshold, SITA Standard and SITA Fast algorithm. Results: SITA Standard was on average approximately twice as fast (7.6 minutes) and SITA Fast approximately 3 times as fast (4.7 minutes) as examinations completed using the Full Threshold algorithm (15.8 minutes). In the clinical environment, the visual field outcome with both SITA algorithms was equivalent to visual field examination using the Full Threshold algorithm in terms of visual inspection of the grey scale plots, defect area and defect severity. Conclusions: Our research shows that both SITA algorithms are able to accurately map visual field loss attributed to VGB. As patients diagnosed with epilepsy are often vulnerable to fatigue, the time saving offered by SITA Fast means that this algorithm has a significant advantage for use with VGB recipients.",
keywords = "Swedish interactive threshold algorithm, Vigabatrin, visual field",
author = "Conway, {Miriam L.} and Hosking, {Sarah L.} and Haogang Zhu and Cubbidge, {Robert P.}",
note = "{\circledC} 2014 Conway et al.; licensee BioMed Central. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.",
year = "2014",
month = "12",
day = "23",
doi = "10.1186/1471-2415-14-166",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
journal = "BMC Ophthalmology",
issn = "1471-2415",
publisher = "BioMed Central",

}

Does the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) accurately map visual field loss attributed to vigabatrin? / Conway, Miriam L.; Hosking, Sarah L.; Zhu, Haogang; Cubbidge, Robert P.

In: BMC Ophthalmology, Vol. 14, 166, 23.12.2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Does the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) accurately map visual field loss attributed to vigabatrin?

AU - Conway, Miriam L.

AU - Hosking, Sarah L.

AU - Zhu, Haogang

AU - Cubbidge, Robert P.

N1 - © 2014 Conway et al.; licensee BioMed Central. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

PY - 2014/12/23

Y1 - 2014/12/23

N2 - Background: Vigabatrin (VGB) is an anti-epileptic medication which has been linked to peripheral constriction of the visual field. Documenting the natural history associated with continued VGB exposure is important when making decisions about the risk and benefits associated with the treatment. Due to its speed the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) has become the algorithm of choice when carrying out Full Threshold automated static perimetry. SITA uses prior distributions of normal and glaucomatous visual field behaviour to estimate threshold sensitivity. As the abnormal model is based on glaucomatous behaviour this algorithm has not been validated for VGB recipients. We aim to assess the clinical utility of the SITA algorithm for accurately mapping VGB attributed field loss. Methods: The sample comprised one randomly selected eye of 16 patients diagnosed with epilepsy, exposed to VGB therapy. A clinical diagnosis of VGB attributed visual field loss was documented in 44% of the group. The mean age was 39.3 years∈±∈14.5 years and the mean deviation was -4.76 dB ±4.34 dB. Each patient was examined with the Full Threshold, SITA Standard and SITA Fast algorithm. Results: SITA Standard was on average approximately twice as fast (7.6 minutes) and SITA Fast approximately 3 times as fast (4.7 minutes) as examinations completed using the Full Threshold algorithm (15.8 minutes). In the clinical environment, the visual field outcome with both SITA algorithms was equivalent to visual field examination using the Full Threshold algorithm in terms of visual inspection of the grey scale plots, defect area and defect severity. Conclusions: Our research shows that both SITA algorithms are able to accurately map visual field loss attributed to VGB. As patients diagnosed with epilepsy are often vulnerable to fatigue, the time saving offered by SITA Fast means that this algorithm has a significant advantage for use with VGB recipients.

AB - Background: Vigabatrin (VGB) is an anti-epileptic medication which has been linked to peripheral constriction of the visual field. Documenting the natural history associated with continued VGB exposure is important when making decisions about the risk and benefits associated with the treatment. Due to its speed the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) has become the algorithm of choice when carrying out Full Threshold automated static perimetry. SITA uses prior distributions of normal and glaucomatous visual field behaviour to estimate threshold sensitivity. As the abnormal model is based on glaucomatous behaviour this algorithm has not been validated for VGB recipients. We aim to assess the clinical utility of the SITA algorithm for accurately mapping VGB attributed field loss. Methods: The sample comprised one randomly selected eye of 16 patients diagnosed with epilepsy, exposed to VGB therapy. A clinical diagnosis of VGB attributed visual field loss was documented in 44% of the group. The mean age was 39.3 years∈±∈14.5 years and the mean deviation was -4.76 dB ±4.34 dB. Each patient was examined with the Full Threshold, SITA Standard and SITA Fast algorithm. Results: SITA Standard was on average approximately twice as fast (7.6 minutes) and SITA Fast approximately 3 times as fast (4.7 minutes) as examinations completed using the Full Threshold algorithm (15.8 minutes). In the clinical environment, the visual field outcome with both SITA algorithms was equivalent to visual field examination using the Full Threshold algorithm in terms of visual inspection of the grey scale plots, defect area and defect severity. Conclusions: Our research shows that both SITA algorithms are able to accurately map visual field loss attributed to VGB. As patients diagnosed with epilepsy are often vulnerable to fatigue, the time saving offered by SITA Fast means that this algorithm has a significant advantage for use with VGB recipients.

KW - Swedish interactive threshold algorithm

KW - Vigabatrin

KW - visual field

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84926466926&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/1471-2415-14-166

DO - 10.1186/1471-2415-14-166

M3 - Article

VL - 14

JO - BMC Ophthalmology

T2 - BMC Ophthalmology

JF - BMC Ophthalmology

SN - 1471-2415

M1 - 166

ER -