Barboni Mirella Telles Salgueiro, Szepessy Zsuzsanna, Ventura Dora Fix, Németh János
Department of Ophthalmology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Department of Experimental Psychology, Institute of Psychology, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil.
Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2018 Apr 23;7(2):25. doi: 10.1167/tvst.7.2.25. eCollection 2018 Apr.
To establish fluctuation limits, it was considered that not only overall macular sensitivity but also fluctuations of individual test points in the macula might have clinical value.
Three repeated measurements of microperimetry were performed using the Standard Expert test of Macular Integrity Assessment (MAIA) in healthy subjects ( = 12, age = 23.8 ± 1.5 years old) and in patients with age-related macular degeneration (AMD) ( = 11, age = 68.5 ± 7.4 years old). A total of 37 macular points arranged in four concentric rings and in four quadrants were analyzed individually and in groups.
The data show low fluctuation of macular sensitivity of individual test points in healthy subjects (average = 1.38 ± 0.28 dB) and AMD patients (average = 2.12 ± 0.60 dB). Lower sensitivity points are more related to higher fluctuation than to the distance from the central point. Fixation stability showed no effect on the sensitivity fluctuation. The 95th percentile of the standard deviations of healthy subjects was, on average, 2.7 dB, ranging from 1.2 to 4 dB, depending on the point tested.
Point analysis and regional analysis might be considered prior to evaluating macular sensitivity fluctuation in order to distinguish between normal variation and a clinical change.
tatistical methods were used to compare repeated microperimetry measurements and to establish fluctuation limits of the macular sensitivity. This analysis could add information regarding the integrity of different macular areas and provide new insights into fixation points prior to the biofeedback fixation training.
为了确定波动限度，人们认为不仅黄斑的整体敏感性，而且黄斑中各个测试点的波动可能都具有临床价值。
在健康受试者（n = 12，年龄 = 23.8 ± 1.5岁）和年龄相关性黄斑变性（AMD）患者（n = 11，年龄 = 68.5 ± 7.4岁）中，使用黄斑完整性评估（MAIA）的标准专家测试对微视野进行了三次重复测量。对总共37个黄斑点进行了分析，这些点排列在四个同心环和四个象限中，分别进行个体分析和分组分析。
数据显示，健康受试者（平均 = 1.38 ± 0.28 dB）和AMD患者（平均 = 2.12 ± 0.60 dB）中各个测试点的黄斑敏感性波动较低。较低敏感性的点与较高的波动更相关，而不是与距中心点的距离相关。注视稳定性对敏感性波动没有影响。健康受试者标准差的第95百分位数平均为2.7 dB，根据测试点的不同，范围在1.2至4 dB之间。
在评估黄斑敏感性波动之前，可能需要考虑点分析和区域分析，以便区分正常变异和临床变化。
使用统计方法比较重复的微视野测量结果，并确定黄斑敏感性的波动限度。该分析可以增加有关不同黄斑区域完整性的信息，并在生物反馈注视训练之前提供有关注视点的新见解。
