Literature DB >> 19324853

Test-retest variability of microperimetry using the Nidek MP1 in patients with macular disease.

Fred K Chen1, Praveen J Patel, Wen Xing, Catey Bunce, Catherine Egan, Adnan T Tufail, Peter J Coffey, Gary S Rubin, Lyndon Da Cruz.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the test-retest variability of the retinal sensitivity of the Nidek MP1 microperimeter in patients with macular disease.
METHODS: In this prospective study, 50 patients were enrolled with a range of macular diseases. One examiner performed two consecutive microperimetry tests for all patients using the same test strategy. Test-retest variability for mean sensitivity (MS), mean deviation (MD), point-wise sensitivity (PWS), local defect classification (LDC), average sensitivity for the central macula (CMS, 16 loci inside 10 degrees ), paracentral macular sensitivity (PMS, 52 loci in the 10 to 20 degrees ring), and dense scotoma size (DSS) were analyzed by calculating the 95% coefficients of repeatability or percentage agreement.
RESULTS: Mean (SD) age and visual acuity were 61 (15) years and 0.34 (0.32) logMAR, respectively. The mean difference in MS between tests 1 and 2 was +0.2 dB (SD, 0.9 dB; P = 0.127). The coefficients of repeatability for MS, MD, CMS, and PMS were 1.81, 2.56, 2.13, and 1.93 dB, respectively. The mean (SD) of coefficients of repeatability for PWS across all 68 loci was 5.56 (0.86) dB. Of all test loci in all patients 76% had perfect agreement in LDC, and 94% of patients had a change in DSS of four or fewer test loci.
CONCLUSIONS: Test-retest variability was lowest for MS and highest for PWS. However, MS does not provide spatial information. The authors recommend the use of CMS and PMS for monitoring macular function and consider a change of greater than 2.56 and 2.31 dB (the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval of their coefficients of repeatability), respectively, to exceed test-retest variability.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19324853     DOI: 10.1167/iovs.08-2926

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci        ISSN: 0146-0404            Impact factor:   4.799


  52 in total

1.  Changes in retinal sensitivity in geographic atrophy progression as measured by microperimetry.

Authors:  Annal D Meleth; Pradeep Mettu; Elvira Agrón; Emily Y Chew; Srinivas R Sadda; Frederick L Ferris; Wai T Wong
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2011-02-28       Impact factor: 4.799

2.  Applying theories and interventions from behavioral medicine to understand and reduce visual field variability in patients with vision loss.

Authors:  Collin Rozanski; Jennifer A Haythornthwaite; Gislin Dagnelie; Ava K Bittner
Journal:  Med Hypotheses       Date:  2014-05-09       Impact factor: 1.538

3.  Fundus-controlled two-color dark adaptometry with the Microperimeter MP1.

Authors:  Wadim Bowl; Knut Stieger; Birgit Lorenz
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-04-24       Impact factor: 3.117

4.  VISUAL FUNCTION MEASURES IN EARLY AND INTERMEDIATE AGE-RELATED MACULAR DEGENERATION.

Authors:  Arthika Chandramohan; Sandra S Stinnett; John T Petrowski; Stefanie G Schuman; Cynthia A Toth; Scott W Cousins; Eleonora M Lad
Journal:  Retina       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 4.256

5.  The IS/OS junction layer in the natural history of type 2 idiopathic macular telangiectasia.

Authors:  Ferenc B Sallo; Tunde Peto; Catherine Egan; Ute E K Wolf-Schnurrbusch; Traci E Clemons; Mark C Gillies; Daniel Pauleikhoff; Gary S Rubin; Emily Y Chew; Alan C Bird
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2012-11-29       Impact factor: 4.799

6.  Longitudinal Microperimetric Changes of Macular Sensitivity in Stargardt Disease After 12 Months: ProgStar Report No. 13.

Authors:  Etienne M Schönbach; Rupert W Strauss; Beatriz Muñoz; Yulia Wolfson; Mohamed A Ibrahim; David G Birch; Eberhart Zrenner; Janet S Sunness; Michael S Ip; SriniVas R Sadda; Sheila K West; Hendrik P N Scholl
Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 7.389

Review 7.  Fundus-driven perimetry (microperimetry) compared to conventional static automated perimetry: similarities, differences, and clinical applications.

Authors:  Jennifer H Acton; Vivienne C Greenstein
Journal:  Can J Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-09-02       Impact factor: 1.882

Review 8.  Microperimetry for geographic atrophy secondary to age-related macular degeneration.

Authors:  Karl G Csaky; Praveen J Patel; Yasir J Sepah; David G Birch; Diana V Do; Michael S Ip; Robyn H Guymer; Chi D Luu; Shamika Gune; Hugh Lin; Daniela Ferrara
Journal:  Surv Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-01-28       Impact factor: 6.048

9.  Prospective microperimetry and OCT evaluation of efficacy of repeated intravitreal bevacizumab injections for persistent clinically significant diabetic macular edema.

Authors:  Romualdo Malagola; Giovanni Spinucci; Carmela Cofone; Luigi Pattavina
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-12-14       Impact factor: 2.031

10.  Macular function and morphologic features in juvenile stargardt disease: longitudinal study.

Authors:  Francesco Testa; Paolo Melillo; Valentina Di Iorio; Ada Orrico; Marcella Attanasio; Settimio Rossi; Francesca Simonelli
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2014-08-02       Impact factor: 12.079

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.