PURPOSE: To evaluate the influence of a blue light spectrum filter (BLSF), similar in light spectrum transmittance to the intraocular lens Acrysof Natural, on standard automated perimetry (SAP) and short-wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP). METHODS: Twenty young individuals (< 30 y.o.), without any systemic or ocular alterations (twenty eyes) underwent a random sequence of four Humphrey visual field tests: standard automated perimetry (SAP) and short-wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP) with and without a blue light spectrum filter. All patients had intraocular pressure lower than 21 mmHg, normal fundus biomicroscopy, and no crystalline lens opacity. Foveal threshold (FT), mean deviation (MD), and pattern standard deviation (PSD) indexes obtained from the visual field tests and the difference caused by eccentricity in short-wavelength automated perimetry examinations were analyzed using paired t test. Interindividual variability (standard deviation) was calculated using Pitman's test for correlated samples. RESULTS: Statistically significant reductions in the mean deviation (p < 0.001) and in the foveal threshold (p < 0.001) measured by short-wavelength automated perimetry with the use of the blue light spectrum filter in comparison to short-wavelength automated perimetry without the use of the blue light spectrum filter were observed, but not in standard automated perimetry exams. No other parameters showed statistically significant differences in the short-wavelength automated perimetry and standard automated perimetry tests. Interindividual standard deviation of the test points in the short-wavelength automated perimetry exams increased with eccentricity both with and without the use of the blue light spectrum filter, as sensitivity for inferior and superior hemifields (inferior hemifield minus superior hemifield), but no statistically significant difference in the variability when comparing the use or not of the blue light spectrum filter was noted. When comparing only the four most inferior points and the four most superior points, the inferior-superior difference increases in both situations - without and with the use of the blue light spectrum filter. The difference between without and with the use of the blue light spectrum filter was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Statistically significant reductions in mean deviation and foveal threshold in the short-wavelength automated perimetry with the use of the blue light spectrum filter were observed, but not in standard automated perimetry examinations. Additional studies are necessary to determine the influence of intraocular lenses with short-wavelength light filter after cataract extraction on short-wavelength automated perimetry.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the influence of a blue light spectrum filter (BLSF), similar in light spectrum transmittance to the intraocular lens Acrysof Natural, on standard automated perimetry (SAP) and short-wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP). METHODS: Twenty young individuals (< 30 y.o.), without any systemic or ocular alterations (twenty eyes) underwent a random sequence of four Humphrey visual field tests: standard automated perimetry (SAP) and short-wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP) with and without a blue light spectrum filter. All patients had intraocular pressure lower than 21 mmHg, normal fundus biomicroscopy, and no crystalline lens opacity. Foveal threshold (FT), mean deviation (MD), and pattern standard deviation (PSD) indexes obtained from the visual field tests and the difference caused by eccentricity in short-wavelength automated perimetry examinations were analyzed using paired t test. Interindividual variability (standard deviation) was calculated using Pitman's test for correlated samples. RESULTS: Statistically significant reductions in the mean deviation (p < 0.001) and in the foveal threshold (p < 0.001) measured by short-wavelength automated perimetry with the use of the blue light spectrum filter in comparison to short-wavelength automated perimetry without the use of the blue light spectrum filter were observed, but not in standard automated perimetry exams. No other parameters showed statistically significant differences in the short-wavelength automated perimetry and standard automated perimetry tests. Interindividual standard deviation of the test points in the short-wavelength automated perimetry exams increased with eccentricity both with and without the use of the blue light spectrum filter, as sensitivity for inferior and superior hemifields (inferior hemifield minus superior hemifield), but no statistically significant difference in the variability when comparing the use or not of the blue light spectrum filter was noted. When comparing only the four most inferior points and the four most superior points, the inferior-superior difference increases in both situations - without and with the use of the blue light spectrum filter. The difference between without and with the use of the blue light spectrum filter was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Statistically significant reductions in mean deviation and foveal threshold in the short-wavelength automated perimetry with the use of the blue light spectrum filter were observed, but not in standard automated perimetry examinations. Additional studies are necessary to determine the influence of intraocular lenses with short-wavelength light filter after cataract extraction on short-wavelength automated perimetry.