Parafoveal scotoma progression in glaucoma: humphrey 10-2 versus 24-2 visual field analysis.
作者： Sung Chul Park , Yungtai Kung , Daniel Su , Joseph L. Simonson , Rafael L. Furlanetto
DOI: 10.1016/J.OPHTHA.2013.01.045
关键词:
摘要: Objective To compare the performance of 10-2 versus 24-2 visual fields (VFs) in detecting progression initial parafoveal scotoma (IPFS) glaucomatous eyes. Design Retrospective, observational study. Participants Glaucoma patients with following criteria: (1) an IPFS (≥3 adjacent points P Methods Based on threshold map sensitivities, VF progression, defined as having 1 or more significantly progressing point(s) a slope sensitivity less than –1.0 dB/year at Main Outcome Measures The number eyes and analyses. Results Fifty (50 patients) were included (mean age ± standard deviation, 62±9 years). Mean follow-up period (5.7 vs. 5.6 years) VFs (7.6 7.8) similar between analyses (all >0.3). Significantly detected (24 11 eyes; = 0.007). This difference became greater within central 10° 4 Conclusions detects glaucoma IPFS, suggesting that closer surveillance using testing algorithms closely spaced grids is warranted scotomas. Financial Disclosure(s) Proprietary commercial disclosure may be found after references.
sci-hub.se 参考文章(22)
Carlos Gustavo V. De Moraes, Risk Factors for Visual Field Progression in Treated Glaucoma Archives of Ophthalmology. ,vol. 129, pp. 562- 568 ,(2010) , 10.1001/ARCHOPHTHALMOL.2011.72
R P L Wormald, E Basauri, L A Wright, J R Evans, The African Caribbean Eye Survey: risk factors for glaucoma in a sample of African Caribbean people living in London Eye. ,vol. 8, pp. 315- 320 ,(1994) , 10.1038/EYE.1994.64
F W Fitzke, R A Hitchings, D Poinoosawmy, A I McNaught, D P Crabb, Analysis of visual field progression in glaucoma. British Journal of Ophthalmology. ,vol. 80, pp. 40- 48 ,(1996) , 10.1136/BJO.80.1.40
A. Cowey, E.T. Rolls, Human cortical magnification factor and its relation to visual acuity Experimental Brain Research. ,vol. 21, pp. 447- 454 ,(1974) , 10.1007/BF00237163
Ulrich Schiefer, Eleni Papageorgiou, Pamela A. Sample, John P. Pascual, Bettina Selig, Elke Krapp, Jens Paetzold, Spatial Pattern of Glaucomatous Visual Field Loss Obtained with Regionally Condensed Stimulus Arrangements Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. ,vol. 51, pp. 5685- 5689 ,(2010) , 10.1167/IOVS.09-5067
Nicholas G. Strouthidis, Andrew Scott, Neena M. Peter, David F. Garway-Heath, Optic disc and visual field progression in ocular hypertensive subjects: detection rates, specificity, and agreement. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. ,vol. 47, pp. 2904- 2910 ,(2006) , 10.1167/IOVS.05-1584
S.A. Talbot, W.H. Marshall, Physiological Studies on Neural Mechanisms of Visual Localization and Discrimination American Journal of Ophthalmology. ,vol. 24, pp. 1255- 1264 ,(1941) , 10.1016/S0002-9394(41)91363-6
A. C Viswanathan, F. W Fitzke, R. A Hitchings, Early detection of visual field progression in glaucoma: a comparison of progressor and statpac 2 British Journal of Ophthalmology. ,vol. 81, pp. 1037- 1042 ,(1997) , 10.1136/BJO.81.12.1037
A. Heijl, G. Lindgren, J. Olsson, Normal variability of static perimetric threshold values across the central visual field. Archives of Ophthalmology. ,vol. 105, pp. 1544- 1549 ,(1987) , 10.1001/ARCHOPHT.1987.01060110090039
Jukka Nevalainen, Jens Paetzold, Eleni Papageorgiou, Pamela A. Sample, John P. Pascual, Elke Krapp, Bettina Selig, Reinhard Vonthein, Ulrich Schiefer, Specification of progression in glaucomatous visual field loss, applying locally condensed stimulus arrangements. Graefes Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology. ,vol. 247, pp. 1659- 1669 ,(2009) , 10.1007/S00417-009-1134-2