Development and evaluation of a contrast sensitivity perimetry test for patients with glaucoma
Development and evaluation of a contrast sensitivity perimetry test for patients with glaucoma
复制标题
DOI：
10.1167/iovs.07-1205
复制
发表时间：
2008-07-01
影响因子：
4.4
通讯作者：
Swanson, William H.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hot, Aliya;Dul, Mitchell W.;Swanson, William H.
目的。目的：设计一种对比敏感度视距（CSP）方案，减少青光眼缺陷的变异性，同时保持对青光眼损失的良好敏感性。20名青光眼患者和20名对照受试者在一个基于监测站实施CSP协议进行了测试。在该方案中，使用峰值空间频率为0.4 cyc/deg的Gabor贴片和二维空间高斯包络对中央视野上的26个位置进行了测试，大部分能量集中在4圆形区域内。采用阶梯法估计阈值。患者和10名年龄相似的对照组也进行了常规自动视野检查（CAP），采用24-2模式和SITA标准测试策略。采用视网膜断层扫描（Retina tomograph II [HRT]; Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany）测量患者的神经视网膜边缘面积。使用Bland-Altman一致性分析来评估测试-重测变异性，比较两种周长测试显示的缺陷深度，并研究对比敏感度与神经视网膜边缘面积之间的关系。与CAP相比，CSP的变异对缺陷深度的依赖性较小（z = 9.3, P < 0.001）。当按象限平均时，CAP和CSP的缺陷深度相似（r = 0.26, P = 0.13）。缺损深度和边缘面积与CSP的关系比与CAP的关系更一致（z = 9, P < 0.001）。CSP的实施成功地减少了青光眼缺陷的复检变异性。CSP在缺损深度方面与CAP基本一致，在hrt确定的边缘面积方面比CAP更一致。
PURPOSE. To design a contrast sensitivity perimetry (CSP) protocol that decreases variability in glaucomatous defects while maintaining good sensitivity to glaucomatous loss.METHODS. Twenty patients with glaucoma and 20 control subjects were tested with a CSP protocol implemented on a monitor-based testing station. In the protocol 26 locations were tested over the central visual field with Gabor patches with a peak spatial frequency of 0.4 cyc/deg and a two-dimensional spatial Gaussian envelope, with most of the energy concentrated within a 4 circular region. Threshold was estimated by a staircase method. Patients and 10 age-similar control subjects were also tested on conventional automated perimetry (CAP), with the 24-2 pattern with the SITA Standard testing strategy. The neuroretinal rim area of the patients was measured with a retinal tomograph (Retina Tomograph II [HRT]; Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany). A Bland-Altman analysis of agreement was used to assess test-retest variability, compare depth of defect shown by the two perimetric tests, and investigate the relations between contrast sensitivity and neuroretinal rim area.RESULTS. Variability showed less dependence on defect depth for CSP than for CAP (z = 9.3, P < 0.001). Defect depth was similar for CAP and CSP when averaged by quadrant (r = 0.26, P > 0.13). The relation between defect depth and rim area was more consistent with CSP than with CAP (z = 9, P < 0.001).CONCLUSIONS. The implementation of CSP was successful in reducing test-retest variability in glaucomatous defects. CSP was in general agreement with CAP in terms of depth of defect and was in better agreement than CAP with HRT-determined rim area.