...
首页> 外文期刊>Ophthalmology >Comparison of standard automated perimetry with matrix frequency-doubling technology in patients with resolved optic neuritis.
【24h】

Comparison of standard automated perimetry with matrix frequency-doubling technology in patients with resolved optic neuritis.

机译:分辨性视神经炎患者标准自动视野检查与矩阵倍频技术的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

PURPOSE: To examine performance characteristics of frequency-doubling perimetry (FDP) in comparison with standard automated perimetry (SAP) in patients with resolved optic neuritis in a short-term follow-up study. DESIGN: Comparative consecutive case series. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty patients with resolved optic neuritis and 20 healthy volunteers participated in this study. METHODS: The subjects were patients who recovered normal vision (1.0 or better) after optic neuritis. The Swedish interactive thresholding algorithm 30-2 program was used for SAP and a full-threshold 30-2 program was used for FDP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Using both forms of perimetry, the mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD), and the percentage of abnormal points significantly depressed <0.5% in the total deviation probability plot were compared. The visual fields were divided into 5 zones, and the mean sensitivity in each zone in affected eyes was compared with that in healthy eyes of the volunteers within 2 weeks of vision recovery and in follow-up after 2 weeks and 2 and 5 months. RESULTS: Standard automated perimetry and FDP showed general depression in the fovea and extrafoveal areas. Correlations between SAP and FDP were statistically significant for MD (Pearson r>0.75; P<0.001) and PSD (r>0.6; P<0.005). Defects detected with FDP were larger than with SAP in 14 eyes (70 %). In follow-up after 2 weeks and again after 2 and 5 months, FDP indicated slower improvement in visual field defects in the fovea and extrafoveal areas, whereas SAP indicated rapid improvement in these defects. CONCLUSIONS: Frequency-doubling perimetry is at least comparable with and potentially more sensitive than SAP in detecting visual field defects in resolved optic neuritis. This short-term follow-up study in patients with resolved optic neuritis suggests that FDP detects characteristics of slower recovery more effectively than SAP in the fovea and extrafoveal areas. These properties may allow more accurate detection of visual field defects and may prove advantageous for monitoring of patients with resolved optic neuritis.
机译:目的:在短期的随访研究中,与已解决的视神经炎患者相比,将倍频视野检查(FDP)与标准自动视野检查(SAP)的性能特征进行比较。设计:比较连续案例系列。参与者:20名视神经炎消退患者和20名健康志愿者参加了这项研究。方法:受试者为视神经炎后视力恢复正常(1.0或更好)的患者。瑞典语交互式阈值算法30-2程序用于SAP,全阈值30-2程序用于FDP。主要观察指标:比较两种形式的视野检查法,在总偏差概率图中比较了平均偏差(MD),模式标准偏差(PSD)和显着压低<0.5%的异常点的百分比。将视野分为5个区域,将受影响的眼睛中每个区域的平均敏感度与志愿者在恢复视力后2周内以及在2周,2和5个月后的随访中健康眼的平均敏感度进行比较。结果:标准自动视野检查和FDP显示在中央凹和中央凹区普遍凹陷。 SAP和FDP之间的相关性在MD(Pearson r> 0.75; P <0.001)和PSD(r> 0.6; P <0.005)方面具有统计学意义。用FDP检测到的缺陷在14眼中比SAP大(70%)。在2周后的随访中,以及在2和5个月后的随访中,FDP提示中央凹和中央凹区视野缺损的改善较慢,而SAP则提示这些缺损的快速改善。结论:倍频视野检查法至少可以与SAP相比,并且可能比SAP更灵敏地检测已解决的视神经炎的视野缺损。在患有视神经炎的患者中进行的这项短期随访研究表明,在中央凹和中央凹区域,FDP比SAP更有效地检测出恢复较慢的特征。这些性质可以允许更准确地检测视野缺损,并且可以证明有利于监测患有视神经炎的患者。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号