Literature DB >> 24177807

Visual field progression with frequency-doubling matrix perimetry and standard automated perimetry in patients with glaucoma and in healthy controls.

Tony Redmond1, Neil O'Leary1, Donna M Hutchison1, Marcelo T Nicolela1, Paul H Artes1, Balwantray C Chauhan1.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: A new analysis method called permutation of pointwise linear regression measures the significance of deterioration over time at each visual field location, combines the significance values into an overall statistic, and then determines the likelihood of change in the visual field. Because the outcome is a single P value, individualized to that specific visual field and independent of the scale of the original measurement, the method is well suited for comparing techniques with different stimuli and scales.
OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that frequency-doubling matrix perimetry (FDT2) is more sensitive than standard automated perimetry (SAP) in identifying visual field progression in glaucoma. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients with open-angle glaucoma and healthy controls were examined by FDT2 and SAP, both with the 24-2 test pattern, on the same day at 6-month intervals in a longitudinal prospective study conducted in a hospital-based setting. Only participants with at least 5 examinations were included. INTERVENTION: Data were analyzed with permutation of pointwise linear regression. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE: Permutation of pointwise linear regression is individualized to each participant, in contrast to current analyses in which the statistical significance is inferred from population-based approaches. Analyses were performed with both total deviation and pattern deviation.
RESULTS: Sixty-four patients and 36 controls were included in the study. The median age, SAP mean deviation, and follow-up period were 65 years, -2.6 dB, and 5.4 years, respectively, in patients and 62 years, +0.4 dB, and 5.2 years, respectively, in controls. Using total deviation analyses, statistically significant deterioration was identified in 17% of patients with FDT2, in 34% of patients with SAP, and in 14% of patients with both techniques; in controls these percentages were 8% with FDT2, 31% with SAP, and 8% with both. Using pattern deviation analyses, statistically significant deterioration was identified in 16% of patients with FDT2, in 17% of patients with SAP, and in 3% of patients with both techniques; in controls these values were 3% with FDT2 and none with SAP. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: No evidence was found that FDT2 is more sensitive than SAP in identifying visual field deterioration. In about one-third of healthy controls, age-related deterioration with SAP reached statistical significance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24177807     DOI: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2013.4382

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Ophthalmol        ISSN: 2168-6165            Impact factor:   7.389


  9 in total

Review 1.  Functional assessment of glaucoma: Uncovering progression.

Authors:  Rongrong Hu; Lyne Racette; Kelly S Chen; Chris A Johnson
Journal:  Surv Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-04-26       Impact factor: 6.048

2.  Comparing the Rule of 5 to Trend-based Analysis for Detecting Glaucoma Progression on OCT.

Authors:  Atalie C Thompson; Alessandro A Jammal; Samuel I Berchuck; Eduardo B Mariottoni; Zhichao Wu; Fabio B Daga; Nara G Ogata; Carla N Urata; Tais Estrela; Felipe A Medeiros
Journal:  Ophthalmol Glaucoma       Date:  2020-06-14

3.  Structural and Functional Evaluations for the Early Detection of Glaucoma.

Authors:  Katie A Lucy; Gadi Wollstein
Journal:  Expert Rev Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-09-14

4.  Comparison of Glaucoma Progression Detection by Optical Coherence Tomography and Visual Field.

Authors:  Xinbo Zhang; Anna Dastiridou; Brian A Francis; Ou Tan; Rohit Varma; David S Greenfield; Joel S Schuman; David Huang
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-09-28       Impact factor: 5.258

5.  Comparison of Methods to Detect and Measure Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression.

Authors:  Alessandro Rabiolo; Esteban Morales; Lilian Mohamed; Vicente Capistrano; Ji Hyun Kim; Abdelmonem Afifi; Fei Yu; Anne L Coleman; Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi; Joseph Caprioli
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2019-09-11       Impact factor: 3.283

6.  The Effective Dynamic Ranges for Glaucomatous Visual Field Progression With Standard Automated Perimetry and Stimulus Sizes III and V.

Authors:  Michael Wall; Gideon K D Zamba; Paul H Artes
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2018-01-01       Impact factor: 4.799

7.  Comparison of matrix frequency-doubling technology perimetry and standard automated perimetry in monitoring the development of visual field defects for glaucoma suspect eyes.

Authors:  Rongrong Hu; Chenkun Wang; Lyne Racette
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-05-18       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Comparison of Standard Automated Perimetry, Short-Wavelength Automated Perimetry, and Frequency-Doubling Technology Perimetry to Monitor Glaucoma Progression.

Authors:  Rongrong Hu; Chenkun Wang; Yangshun Gu; Lyne Racette
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 1.889

9.  Usefulness of frequency doubling technology perimetry 24-2 in glaucoma with parafoveal scotoma.

Authors:  Kyoung In Jung; Eun Kyoung Kim; Chan Kee Park
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.817

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.