Literature DB >> 19696803

Non-conventional perimetric methods in the detection of early glaucomatous functional damage.

M L Salvetat1, M Zeppieri, C Tosoni, L Parisi, P Brusini.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the ability of frequency-doubling technology (FDT), rarebit perimetry (RBP), and pulsar perimetry (PP) in detecting early glaucomatous functional damage.
METHODS: This prospective observational cross-sectional case study included 52 patients with early primary open-angle glaucoma (mean deviation -2.3+/-1.1 dB; pattern standard deviation 3.0+/-1.2 dB) and 53 healthy controls. Visual field (VF) testing included standard automated perimetry (SAP) Humphrey Field Analyzer 30-2, FDT N-30, RBP (version 4.0), and PP T30W. One eye per patient was considered. Sensitivity at fixed specificities and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AROC) for discriminating between healthy and glaucomatous eyes were calculated and compared.
RESULTS: The parameters associated with the largest AROC, which were not statistically different (Hanley-McNeil method, P0.42-0.71) were as follows: number of locations in the pattern deviation probability (PDP) plot with P<5% for FDT (0.93); mean hit rate for RBP (0.95); and mean defect for PP (0.94). PP test duration was significantly shorter than FDT and RBP (P<0.002).
CONCLUSIONS: FDT, PP, and RBP are useful non-conventional VF methods in detecting early glaucomatous VF defects with similar AROCs. The methods were rapid and easy, and PP took less than half the time than SAP. These non-conventional testing may prove to be useful in providing additional information in the diagnosis of glaucoma suspect with normal SAP results, in the therapeutic decision-making process of early glaucomatous patients, and in subjects unable to perform VF testing with SAP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19696803     DOI: 10.1038/eye.2009.216

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eye (Lond)        ISSN: 0950-222X            Impact factor:   3.775


  8 in total

Review 1.  [Pulsar perimetry. A review and new results].

Authors:  M Gonzalez de la Rosa; M Gonzalez-Hernandez
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 1.059

Review 2.  'Structure-function relationship' in glaucoma: past thinking and current concepts.

Authors:  Rizwan Malik; William H Swanson; David F Garway-Heath
Journal:  Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-04-12       Impact factor: 4.207

3.  Flicker-defined form perimetry in glaucoma patients.

Authors:  Folkert K Horn; Jan Kremers; Christian Y Mardin; Anselm G Jünemann; Werner Adler; Ralf P Tornow
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-12-16       Impact factor: 3.117

4.  Comparison of frequency doubling and flicker defined form perimetry in early glaucoma.

Authors:  Folkert K Horn; Vicki Scharch; Christian Y Mardin; Robert Lämmer; Jan Kremers
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-02-17       Impact factor: 3.117

5.  Diagnostic capability of Pulsar perimetry in pre-perimetric and early glaucoma.

Authors:  Kazunori Hirasawa; Natsumi Takahashi; Kazuhiro Matsumura; Masayuki Kasahara; Nobuyuki Shoji
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-06-12       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Visual Field Reconstruction Using fMRI-Based Techniques.

Authors:  Joana Carvalho; Azzurra Invernizzi; Joana Martins; Nomdo M Jansonius; Remco J Renken; Frans W Cornelissen
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2021-01-13       Impact factor: 3.283

7.  Frequency doubling technology, optical coherence technology and pattern electroretinogram in ocular hypertension.

Authors:  Mauro Cellini; Pier Giorgio Toschi; Ernesto Strobbe; Nicole Balducci; Emilio C Campos
Journal:  BMC Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-08-01       Impact factor: 2.209

8.  The Diagnostic Value of Pulsar Perimetry, Optical Coherence Tomography, and Optical Coherence Tomography Angiography in Pre-Perimetric and Perimetric Glaucoma.

Authors:  Hung-Chih Chen; Michael Chia-Yen Chou; Ming-Tsung Lee; Chia-Yi Lee; Che-Ning Yang; Chin-Hsin Liu; Shih-Chun Chao
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-12-13       Impact factor: 4.241

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.