Faran Sabeti1, Chris J Nolan2, Andrew C James1, Alicia Jenkins3, Ted Maddess1. 1. Eccles Institute for Neuroscience The John Curtin School of Medical Research, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia. 2. Department of Endocrinology, Canberra Hospital and The Australian National University Medical School, Canbera, Australian Capital Territory, Australia. 3. University of Sydney, NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, Camperdown, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Retinal light sensitivity loss has been shown to occur prior to other signs of retinopathy and may predict the sight-threatening sequelae. A rapid, objective perimetric test could augment diabetes care. We investigated the clinical use of multifocal pupillographic objective perimetry (mfPOP) to identify patients with and without diabetic retinopathy. METHODS: Retinopathy severity was determined using the Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) standard for fundus photography. Pupillary responses were measured from both eyes of 25 adults with none to moderate diabetic retinopathy and 24 age-matched controls, using three mfPOP stimulus variants. Multifocal pupillographic objective perimetry stimulus variants tested 44 regions per eye arranged in a five-ring dartboard layout presented within either the central 30° or 60° of fixation. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were produced from contraction amplitudes and time to peak responses. RESULTS: Regression analysis revealed that mean amplitude deviations were larger with severity of early retinopathy. On average, the longest delays were measured in patients with no retinopathy. The brightest wide-field stimuli produced the highest area under the ROC curve for differentiating eyes with no retinopathy from nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) and from healthy eyes (100 ± 0.0%, mean ± SE). The asymmetry in local delay deviations between eyes tended to produce higher sensitivity and specificity than amplitude deviations. CONCLUSIONS: Asymmetry in local response delays measured by mfPOP may provide useful information regarding the severity of diabetic retinopathy and may have clinical use as a rapid, noninvasive method for identifying functional loss even in the absence of NPDR.
PURPOSE: Retinal light sensitivity loss has been shown to occur prior to other signs of retinopathy and may predict the sight-threatening sequelae. A rapid, objective perimetric test could augment diabetes care. We investigated the clinical use of multifocal pupillographic objective perimetry (mfPOP) to identify patients with and without diabetic retinopathy. METHODS:Retinopathy severity was determined using the Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) standard for fundus photography. Pupillary responses were measured from both eyes of 25 adults with none to moderate diabetic retinopathy and 24 age-matched controls, using three mfPOP stimulus variants. Multifocal pupillographic objective perimetry stimulus variants tested 44 regions per eye arranged in a five-ring dartboard layout presented within either the central 30° or 60° of fixation. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were produced from contraction amplitudes and time to peak responses. RESULTS: Regression analysis revealed that mean amplitude deviations were larger with severity of early retinopathy. On average, the longest delays were measured in patients with no retinopathy. The brightest wide-field stimuli produced the highest area under the ROC curve for differentiating eyes with no retinopathy from nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) and from healthy eyes (100 ± 0.0%, mean ± SE). The asymmetry in local delay deviations between eyes tended to produce higher sensitivity and specificity than amplitude deviations. CONCLUSIONS: Asymmetry in local response delays measured by mfPOP may provide useful information regarding the severity of diabetic retinopathy and may have clinical use as a rapid, noninvasive method for identifying functional loss even in the absence of NPDR.
Authors: Jason C Park; Yi-Fan Chen; Norman P Blair; Felix Y Chau; Jennifer I Lim; Yannek I Leiderman; Mahnaz Shahidi; J Jason McAnany Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-03-23 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Carina Kelbsch; Torsten Strasser; Yanjun Chen; Beatrix Feigl; Paul D Gamlin; Randy Kardon; Tobias Peters; Kathryn A Roecklein; Stuart R Steinhauer; Elemer Szabadi; Andrew J Zele; Helmut Wilhelm; Barbara J Wilhelm Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2019-02-22 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Bhim B Rai; Rohan W Essex; Faran Sabeti; Ted Maddess; Emilie M F Rohan; Joshua P van Kleef; Corinne F Carle Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Bhim B Rai; Ted Maddess; Corinne F Carle; Emilie M F Rohan; Josh P van Kleef; Richard C Barry; Rohan W Essex; Christopher J Nolan; Faran Sabeti Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2021-11-01 Impact factor: 3.283
Authors: Corinne F Carle; Andrew C James; Faran Sabeti; Maria Kolic; Rohan W Essex; Chris Shean; Rhiannon Jeans; Aiasha Saikal; Alice Licinio; Ted Maddess Journal: Transl Vis Sci Technol Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 3.283