Peking University Third Hospital, Peking University Eye Center, Key Laboratory of Vision Loss and Restoration, Ministry of Education, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Ophthalmology. 2010 Aug;117(8):1530-7, 1537.e1-2. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.12.034. Epub 2010 May 13.
To determine whether frequency-doubling technology (FDT) perimetry detects visual field loss in perimetrically normal eyes of patients with open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and whether these visual field defects subsequently are detected by standard automated perimetry (SAP), and to explore the relating factors of the progression from abnormalities based on FDT to visual field loss based on SAP.
Prospective cohort study.
Sixty-eight OAG patients with unilateral field loss detected by SAP (Octopus, G2 program; Interzeig, Schlieren, Switzerland).
Perimetrically normal eyes of participants were examined with the FDT N-30 threshold program (Humphrey Instruments, Welch-Allyn, Skaneateles, NY). The visual field examination was followed by a series of SAP examinations administered over 3 years.
The relationship between FDT and subsequent SAP results in perimetrically normal eyes was analyzed. Glaucomatous optic neuropathy (GON), visual field indices, intraocular pressure (IOP), and central corneal thickness (CCT) were compared between converters (eyes with subsequent SAP abnormality) and nonconverters within perimetrically normal eyes with abnormal FDT results. Finally, the SAP test points were matched to the abnormal FDT sectors. The relative risk (RR) of subsequent SAP abnormality corresponding to FDT abnormal sectors was calculated.
Sixty perimetrically normal eyes of 60 participants had complete data and a qualifying follow-up. Baseline FDT results were abnormal in 65%. Of the eyes with abnormal FDT results, 51% developed abnormal SAP results after 4 to 27 months, whereas none of the eyes with normal FDT results developed abnormal SAP results (P<0.05). In perimetrically normal eyes with abnormal FDT results, converters had a greater cup-to-disc ratio, more eyes with GON, larger and deeper cups, and worse FDT mean deviation than nonconverters (P<0.05). The IOP and CCT did not differ between the 2 groups. The RR of subsequent SAP abnormality corresponding to abnormal FDT sectors was 5.38 (95% confidence interval, 3.61-8.04; P<0.05).
In perimetrically normal eyes of OAG patients, FDT detected visual field loss in almost 2 of every 3 of these eyes and also predicted to some extent future visual field loss on SAP. Severity of glaucomatous neuropathy at baseline was related to conversion of abnormalities on FDT to visual field loss on SAP.
确定倍频技术（FDT）视野计是否能检测出开角型青光眼（OAG）患者周边正常眼的视野损失，以及这些视野缺陷是否随后被标准自动视野计（SAP）检测到，并探讨基于 FDT 的异常进展为基于 SAP 的视野损失的相关因素。
前瞻性队列研究。
68 例单侧 SAP 检测到视野缺损的 OAG 患者（Octopus，G2 程序；Interzeig，Schlieren，瑞士）。
对参与者的周边正常眼进行 FDT N-30 阈值程序检查（Humphrey Instruments，Welch-Allyn，Skaneateles，NY）。视野检查后，在 3 年内进行一系列 SAP 检查。
分析 FDT 与周边正常眼后续 SAP 结果的关系。比较青光眼视神经病变（GON）、视野指数、眼内压（IOP）和中央角膜厚度（CCT）在 FDT 结果异常的转导者（后续 SAP 异常眼）和未转导者之间。最后，将 SAP 测试点与异常 FDT 区域匹配。计算对应于 FDT 异常区域的后续 SAP 异常的相对风险（RR）。
60 名参与者的 60 只周边正常眼有完整数据和合格的随访。基线 FDT 结果异常率为 65%。在 FDT 结果异常的眼中，51%在 4 至 27 个月后出现异常 SAP 结果，而无 FDT 结果正常的眼中无一例出现异常 SAP 结果（P<0.05）。在 FDT 结果异常的周边正常眼中，转导者杯盘比更大、GON 更多、杯更深、FDT 平均偏差更差（P<0.05）。两组间 IOP 和 CCT 无差异。对应于异常 FDT 区域的后续 SAP 异常的 RR 为 5.38（95%置信区间，3.61-8.04；P<0.05）。
在 OAG 患者的周边正常眼中，FDT 在这些眼中近 2/3 的眼中检测到视野损失，并且在一定程度上预测了 SAP 上未来的视野损失。基线时青光眼神经病变的严重程度与 FDT 异常向 SAP 视野损失的转化有关。
