Kamantigue Maria E G, Joson Peter J, Chen Philip P
Department of Ophthalmology, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
J Glaucoma. 2006 Feb;15(1):35-9. doi: 10.1097/01.ijg.0000196621.41991.ff.
To determine if perimetric defects, initially seen with C-20-1 frequency doubling technology (FDT) in eyes with normal standard automated perimetry (SAP), will subsequently develop on standard automated perimetry.
Review of patients considered high-risk glaucoma suspects (GS) or with ocular hypertension (OHT), who underwent one C-20-1 FDT in 1997 or 1998. An abnormal frequency doubling technology was defined in two ways, as having either at least one, or at least two abnormal locations. An abnormal standard automated perimetry was defined as fulfilling two of three modified Anderson criteria for abnormality on two consecutive tests and at final standard automated perimetry.
Of 63 eyes (50 patients), 18 (28.6%) had >or=1 FDT defects, and 12 (19.0%) had >or=2 defects. After follow-up of 62 +/- 26 months, an abnormal standard automated perimetry developed in 5 eyes (28%) with frequency doubling technology defects at 22 +/- 13 months (28% of eyes with >or=1 defect and 42% of eyes with >or=2 FDT defects), and in 4 of 45 eyes (9%) with normal frequency doubling technology at 32 +/- 30 months. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed the risk of an abnormal standard automated perimetry at 5 years with <or=1 FDT defect, no defects, >or=1 defects, and >or=2 defects, was 10.3%, 11.8%, 30.6%, and 46.4% respectively (P = 0.060 for >or=1 defects compared with no defects; P = 0.002 for >or=2 defects compared with <or=1 defect).
Abnormal results on C-20-1 frequency doubling technology perimetry predicted glaucomatous visual field loss on standard automated perimetry in some patients in this patient population, though a relatively high false positive rate was noted. Abnormality on C-20-1 frequency doubling technology warrants close observation, and further prospective evaluation is warranted.
确定在标准自动视野计（SAP）检查结果正常的眼中，最初通过C-20-1频率加倍技术（FDT）检测到的视野缺损是否会在随后的标准自动视野计检查中出现。
回顾1997年或1998年接受过一次C-20-1 FDT检查的高危青光眼可疑患者（GS）或高眼压症（OHT）患者。异常的频率加倍技术通过两种方式定义，即至少有一个或至少有两个异常部位。异常的标准自动视野计检查定义为在连续两次检查以及最终的标准自动视野计检查中满足三项改良安德森异常标准中的两项。
在63只眼（50例患者）中，18只眼（28.6%）有≥1个FDT缺损，12只眼（19.0%）有≥2个缺损。经过62±26个月的随访，5只眼（28%）在22±13个月时出现了频率加倍技术缺损，随后出现了异常的标准自动视野计检查结果（有≥1个缺损的眼中占28%，有≥2个FDT缺损的眼中占42%），45只频率加倍技术检查结果正常的眼中有4只眼（9%）在32±30个月时出现异常。Kaplan-Meier生存分析显示，5年时标准自动视野计检查结果异常的风险，在有≤1个FDT缺损、无缺损、≥1个缺损和≥2个缺损的情况下，分别为10.3%、11.8%、30.6%和46.4%（≥1个缺损与无缺损相比，P = 0.060；≥2个缺损与≤1个缺损相比，P = 0.002）。
在该患者群体中，部分患者C-20-1频率加倍技术视野计检查的异常结果可预测标准自动视野计检查中的青光眼性视野缺损，不过假阳性率相对较高。C-20-1频率加倍技术检查结果异常值得密切观察，有必要进行进一步的前瞻性评估。
