Understanding the role of microperimetry in glaucoma

Purpose The present narrative review attempts to provide an overview on the use of microperimetry or fundus-driven perimetry in glaucoma, considering the clinical use, the different strategies and limits compared to standard automated perimetry. Methods An electronic database (PubMed and Medline) search was performed of articles of any type published in the English language between 1998 and 2020 with a combination of the following terms: microperimetry, glaucoma, primary open-angle chronic glaucoma, visual field, Humphrey visual field, fundus automated perimetry. Results All the original articles, case reports, and short series analyzed were included in the present review, offering an excursus on the strengths and limitations characterizing the use of microperimetry in glaucomatous patients. The characteristics of a recently introduced fundus-driven perimetry Compass (CMP; Centervue, Padua, Italy) were also included. Conclusion Although there remain several contradictions regarding routine use of microperimetry and the restricted research on this topic limits our ability to draw firm conclusions, microperimetry may be preferable in cases of localized retinal nerve fiber layer defects in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma and normal visual field. However, standard automated perimetry remains the gold standard for monitoring glaucoma, especially in patients with diffuse retinal nerve fiber layer impairment and visual field defects. The newly introduced Compass device can potentially provide a more accurate structural–functional evaluation than standard automated perimetry and can therefore produce superior testing reliability.