Threshold Automated Perimetry of the Full Visual Field in Patients With Glaucoma With Mild Visual Loss

被引:4
|
作者
Wall, Michael [1 ,2 ]
Lee, Eric J. [1 ]
Wanzek, Robert J. [1 ]
Zamba, K. D. [3 ]
Turpin, Andrew [4 ]
Chong, Luke X. [5 ]
Marin-Franch, Ivan [6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Iowa, Coll Med, Dept Ophthalmol, Vet Adm Hosp, Iowa City, IA 52242 USA
[2] Univ Iowa, Coll Med, Dept Neurol, Vet Adm Hosp, Iowa City, IA 52242 USA
[3] Univ Iowa, Coll Publ Hlth, Dept Biostat, Iowa City, IA USA
[4] Univ Melbourne, Sch Comp & Informat Syst, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[5] Deakin Univ, Sch Med Optometry, Geelong, Vic, Australia
[6] Computat Optometry, Granada, Spain
关键词
glaucoma; perimetry; visual field; vision testing; EFFECTIVE DYNAMIC RANGES; STIMULUS SIZES III; OCULAR-SAFETY; PROGRESSION; STANDARD; PATTERN; SITA; VARIABILITY; SENSITIVITY; VIGABATRIN;
D O I
10.1097/IJG.0000000000001372
中图分类号
R77 [眼科学];
学科分类号
100212 ;
摘要
Precis: The authors used the Open Perimetry Interface to design a static automated perimetry test of the full field. Abnormal test locations in the nasal midperiphery and temporal inferior sector area best separated glaucomas from normals. Purpose: The peripheral visual field in glaucoma outside 30 degrees is largely unexplored with static perimetry. Their goal was to use threshold static automated perimetry to characterize the visual loss in glaucoma of the central 30 degrees and the far periphery. Patients and Methods: The authors administered the 30-2 perimetric test to 27 patients with early stage glaucoma (with mean deviation better than -4 dB) with the Goldmann III and V stimulus sizes and a custom test from 30 to up to 87 degrees with the size V stimulus twice within a month. The authors quantified (1) the retest variability, (2) the proportion of patients flagged as abnormal (at level 0.05) on the basis of pointwise probability distributions obtained from 63 ocular healthy observers, (3) the pointwise statistical distance using the Kullback-Leibler divergence between normal and glaucoma eyes, and (4) the effect of eccentricity on visual loss. Results: Size V 30-2 testing identified significantly more abnormal test locations (36%) than size III 30-2 (30%; P=0.004). Kullback-Leibler divergence between healthy and glaucoma distributions was greatest for the nasal midperipheral test locations and the inferior temporal sector area. A more pronounced decrease was found in visual sensitivity with eccentricity in the patients with glaucoma compared with the ocular healthy participants across the full visual field (P<0.001). Conclusions: Patients with glaucoma demonstrate a systematic decrease in sensitivity with eccentricity across the full visual field. Goldmann size V stimuli better detected visual loss in patients with glaucoma with mild loss than size III.
引用
收藏
页码:997 / 1005
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Visual Field Progression With Frequency-Doubling Matrix Perimetry and Standard Automated Perimetry in Patients With Glaucoma and in Healthy Controls
    Redmond, Tony
    O'Leary, Neil
    Hutchison, Donna M.
    Nicolela, Marcelo T.
    Artes, Paul H.
    Chauhan, Balwantray C.
    JAMA OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2013, 131 (12) : 1565 - 1572
  • [22] Detection of visual field progression in glaucoma with standard achromatic perimetry: A review and practical implications
    Nouri-Mahdavi, Kouros
    Nassiri, Nariman
    Giangiacomo, Annette
    Caprioli, Joseph
    GRAEFES ARCHIVE FOR CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2011, 249 (11) : 1593 - 1616
  • [23] Comparing a Head-Mounted Smartphone Visual Field Analyzer to Standard Automated Perimetry in Glaucoma: A Prospective Study
    Wang, Sean K.
    Tran, Elaine M.
    Yan, William
    Kosaraju, Reshma
    Sun, Yang
    Chang, Robert T.
    JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2024, 33 (10) : 742 - 747
  • [24] The Relationship Between Binocular Visual Field Loss and Various Stages of Monocular Visual Field Damage in Glaucoma Patients
    Xu, Jianan
    Lu, Peng
    Dai, Miaomiao
    Huang, Wenmin
    Lin, Jialiu
    Huang, Jingjing
    JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2019, 28 (01) : 42 - 50
  • [25] Impact of Demographics on Regional Visual Field Loss and Deterioration in Glaucoma
    Pang, Yueyin
    Tang, Melody
    Shi, Min
    Tian, Yu
    Luo, Yan
    Elze, Tobias
    Pasquale, Louis R.
    Zebardast, Nazlee
    Boland, Michael, V
    Friedman, David S.
    Shen, Lucy Q.
    Lokhande, Anagha
    Wang, Mengyu
    TRANSLATIONAL VISION SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2024, 13 (08):
  • [26] Examining Visual Field Loss in Patients in Glaucoma Clinics During Their Predicted Remaining Lifetime
    Saunders, Luke J.
    Russell, Richard A.
    Kirwan, James F.
    McNaught, Andrew I.
    Crabb, David P.
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 2014, 55 (01) : 102 - 109
  • [27] Comparison of visual evoked potentials, automated perimetry and frequency-doubling perimetry in early detection of glaucomatous visual field loss
    Saric, D
    Mandic, Z
    Ivekovic, R
    Geber, MZ
    Bencic, G
    Tomic, Z
    Grgic, D
    COLLEGIUM ANTROPOLOGICUM, 2005, 29 : 111 - 113
  • [28] Predictors of Long-Term Visual Field Fluctuation in Glaucoma Patients
    Rabiolo, Alessandro
    Morales, Esteban
    Kim, Ji Hyun
    Afifi, Abdelmonem A.
    Yu, Fei
    Nouri-Mahdavi, Kouros
    Caprioli, Joseph
    OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2020, 127 (06) : 739 - 747
  • [29] Expert Evaluation of Visual Field Decay in Glaucoma Correlates With the Fast Component of Visual Field Loss
    Cirineo, Nila
    Morales, Esteban
    Lee, Jun Mo
    Ramanathan, Meera
    Hirunpatravong, Pradtana
    Lin, Mark
    Capistrano, Vicente
    Abdelmonen, Afifi
    Yu, Fei
    Nouri-Mahdavi, Kouros
    Coleman, Anne L.
    Caprioli, Joseph
    JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2017, 26 (10) : 902 - 910
  • [30] Central Field Index Versus Visual Field Index for Central Visual Function in Stable Glaucoma
    Rao, Aparna
    Padhy, Debananda
    Mudunuri, B. Optom Harika
    Roy, Avik K.
    Sarangi, Sarada P.
    Optom, B.
    Das, Gopinath
    JOURNAL OF GLAUCOMA, 2017, 26 (01) : 1 - 7