File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Comparison of standard automated perimetry, frequency-doubling technology perimetry, and short-wavelength automated perimetry for detection of glaucoma

TitleComparison of standard automated perimetry, frequency-doubling technology perimetry, and short-wavelength automated perimetry for detection of glaucoma
Authors
Issue Date2011
Citation
Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 2011, v. 52, n. 10, p. 7325-7331 How to Cite?
AbstractPurpose. To compare the performance of standard automated perimetry (SAP), frequency-doubling technology (FDT) perimetry, and short-wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP) in detecting glaucoma. Methods. One hundred thirty-two eyes of 95 glaucoma patients and 37 normal subjects had retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) imaging and visual field testing by SAP, Matrix FDT perimetry, and Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm (SITA) SWAP at the same visit (all perimeters by Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., Dublin, CA). Visual field defects were confirmed with two or more consecutive examinations by the same types of perimetry. Glaucoma was defined with the reference to the RNFL thickness deviation map score (≥4, glaucomatous; ≤2, normal). The sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of MD (mean deviation) and PSD (pattern standard deviation) of the perimetries were compared. Results. Taking all glaucoma patients into consideration, the sensitivity was highest for Matrix FDT perimetry (69%), followed by SAP (68%), and then SITA SWAP (59%). When the analysis included only patients with early glaucoma, the sensitivity decreased to 52%, 46%, and 34%, respectively, with a significant difference detected between Matrix FDT perimetry and SITA SWAP (P = 0.034). The specificity was ≥97% for all perimetries. The AUCs of MD and PSD followed a similar order, with Matrix FDT perimetry having the greatest AUC (0.89-0.94), followed by SAP (0.87-0.94), and then SITA SWAP (0.69-0.90). There were significant differences in sensitivities at 90% specificity between Matrix FDT perimetry and SITA SWAP (P ≤ 0.005 for MD; P ≤ 0.039 for PSD). Conclusions. The performance for glaucoma detection was comparable between FDT perimetry and SAP. FDT perimetry had a higher sensitivity for detecting glaucoma than did SWAP at a comparable level of specificity. © 2011 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/298562
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 5.0
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.422
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Shu-
dc.contributor.authorLam, Shi-
dc.contributor.authorWeinreb, Robert N.-
dc.contributor.authorYe, Cong-
dc.contributor.authorCheung, Carol Y.-
dc.contributor.authorLai, Gilda-
dc.contributor.authorLam, Dennis Shun Chiu-
dc.contributor.authorLeung, Christopher Kai Shun-
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-08T03:08:46Z-
dc.date.available2021-04-08T03:08:46Z-
dc.date.issued2011-
dc.identifier.citationInvestigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 2011, v. 52, n. 10, p. 7325-7331-
dc.identifier.issn0146-0404-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/298562-
dc.description.abstractPurpose. To compare the performance of standard automated perimetry (SAP), frequency-doubling technology (FDT) perimetry, and short-wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP) in detecting glaucoma. Methods. One hundred thirty-two eyes of 95 glaucoma patients and 37 normal subjects had retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) imaging and visual field testing by SAP, Matrix FDT perimetry, and Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm (SITA) SWAP at the same visit (all perimeters by Carl Zeiss Meditec, Inc., Dublin, CA). Visual field defects were confirmed with two or more consecutive examinations by the same types of perimetry. Glaucoma was defined with the reference to the RNFL thickness deviation map score (≥4, glaucomatous; ≤2, normal). The sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of MD (mean deviation) and PSD (pattern standard deviation) of the perimetries were compared. Results. Taking all glaucoma patients into consideration, the sensitivity was highest for Matrix FDT perimetry (69%), followed by SAP (68%), and then SITA SWAP (59%). When the analysis included only patients with early glaucoma, the sensitivity decreased to 52%, 46%, and 34%, respectively, with a significant difference detected between Matrix FDT perimetry and SITA SWAP (P = 0.034). The specificity was ≥97% for all perimetries. The AUCs of MD and PSD followed a similar order, with Matrix FDT perimetry having the greatest AUC (0.89-0.94), followed by SAP (0.87-0.94), and then SITA SWAP (0.69-0.90). There were significant differences in sensitivities at 90% specificity between Matrix FDT perimetry and SITA SWAP (P ≤ 0.005 for MD; P ≤ 0.039 for PSD). Conclusions. The performance for glaucoma detection was comparable between FDT perimetry and SAP. FDT perimetry had a higher sensitivity for detecting glaucoma than did SWAP at a comparable level of specificity. © 2011 The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofInvestigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science-
dc.titleComparison of standard automated perimetry, frequency-doubling technology perimetry, and short-wavelength automated perimetry for detection of glaucoma-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_OA_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1167/iovs.11-7795-
dc.identifier.pmid21810975-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-84862833576-
dc.identifier.volume52-
dc.identifier.issue10-
dc.identifier.spage7325-
dc.identifier.epage7331-
dc.identifier.eissn1552-5783-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000295467200038-
dc.identifier.f100013339998-
dc.identifier.issnl0146-0404-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats