• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

根据测试点的严重程度和错位情况对青光眼患者进行汉弗莱视野分析仪和MP-3微视野计的比较

Comparison of the Humphrey Field Analyzer and MP-3 Microperimeter in Patients With Glaucoma, Classified by Severity and Misalignment of Test Points.

作者信息

Inooka Taiga, Tomita Ryo, Kominami Taro, Mochizuki Marie, Nishiguchi Koji M, Yuki Kenya

机构信息

Department of Ophthalmology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.

出版信息

Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2025 Apr 1;14(4):6. doi: 10.1167/tvst.14.4.6.

DOI:10.1167/tvst.14.4.6
PMID:40178475
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11977792/
Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare Nidek MP-3 microperimetry and ZEISS Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA) visual field (VF) results in patients with primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG), classified by VF defect severity and to describe a novel method for simulating sensitivity distribution changes assumed to be due to fixation errors.

METHODS

This retrospective study used the MP-3 and HFA 10-2 tests to examine the VF in eyes with mild, moderate, or severe POAG, using 68 identical test points. Reliability indices and measurement durations were compared. The relationship between pointwise sensitivities of the devices was analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirty-five eyes from 23 patients (10 mild, 12 moderate, and 13 severe POAG) were evaluated. In the severe POAG group, the MP-3 had a significantly lower false-positive (FP) rate and higher false-negative rate than those of the HFA 10-2 (all, P = 0.03). A significant negative correlation existed between the root mean square error, derived from regression analysis comparing the VF sensitivity between devices at each test point, and VF sensitivity of the MP-3 (P < 0.01). In 18 eyes, a shift in the sensitivity distribution occurred, with a significant correlation between the HFA 10-2 mean deviation and the presence of this shift (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Reliability indices differed significantly between the two devices in severe POAG cases. A shift in the sensitivity of the test points of the two VF tests was detected in approximately one-half of the eyes.

TRANSLATIONAL RELEVANCE

The MP-3 provides lower FP rates in advanced POAG and may assist in the management of this patient cohort.

摘要

目的

比较尼德克MP - 3微视野计与蔡司汉弗莱视野分析仪(HFA)在原发性开角型青光眼(POAG)患者中的视野(VF)结果,按视野缺损严重程度分类,并描述一种模拟假定由注视误差导致的敏感度分布变化的新方法。

方法

这项回顾性研究使用MP - 3和HFA 10 - 2测试,通过68个相同测试点检查轻度、中度或重度POAG患者的视野。比较可靠性指标和测量时长。分析两种设备逐点敏感度之间的关系。

结果

对23例患者的35只眼(10例轻度、12例中度和13例重度POAG)进行了评估。在重度POAG组中,MP - 3的假阳性(FP)率显著低于HFA 10 - 2,假阴性率高于HFA 10 - 2(均P = 0.03)。通过比较各测试点两种设备视野敏感度的回归分析得出的均方根误差与MP - 3的视野敏感度之间存在显著负相关(P < 0.01)。在18只眼中,敏感度分布发生了偏移,HFA 10 - 2平均偏差与这种偏移的存在之间存在显著相关性(P < 0.01)。

结论

在重度POAG病例中,两种设备的可靠性指标存在显著差异。在约一半的眼中检测到两种视野测试的测试点敏感度发生了偏移。

转化相关性

MP - 3在晚期POAG中提供较低的FP率,可能有助于该患者群体的管理。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6109/11977792/5208f96c289a/tvst-14-4-6-f002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6109/11977792/b04671cc1e27/tvst-14-4-6-f001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6109/11977792/5208f96c289a/tvst-14-4-6-f002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6109/11977792/b04671cc1e27/tvst-14-4-6-f001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6109/11977792/5208f96c289a/tvst-14-4-6-f002.jpg

相似文献

1
Comparison of the Humphrey Field Analyzer and MP-3 Microperimeter in Patients With Glaucoma, Classified by Severity and Misalignment of Test Points.根据测试点的严重程度和错位情况对青光眼患者进行汉弗莱视野分析仪和MP-3微视野计的比较
Transl Vis Sci Technol. 2025 Apr 1;14(4):6. doi: 10.1167/tvst.14.4.6.
2
Evaluating the Usefulness of MP-3 Microperimetry in Glaucoma Patients.评估 MP-3 微视野计在青光眼患者中的应用价值。
Am J Ophthalmol. 2018 Mar;187:1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2017.12.002. Epub 2017 Dec 15.
3
Comparison and Correlation of Retinal Sensitivity Between Microperimetry and Standard Automated Perimetry in Low-tension Glaucoma.低眼压性青光眼中小视野计与自动视野计视网膜敏感度的比较与相关性。
J Glaucoma. 2020 Oct;29(10):975-980. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000001599.
4
Microperimetry, Humphrey field analyzer, and optical coherence tomography in detecting glaucoma: a comparative performance study.微视野计、Humphrey 视野分析仪和光学相干断层扫描在青光眼检测中的比较性能研究。
Int Ophthalmol. 2022 Jul;42(7):2155-2165. doi: 10.1007/s10792-022-02215-7. Epub 2022 Jan 13.
5
Comparison between MP-1 and Humphrey visual field defects in glaucoma and retinitis pigmentosa.青光眼和视网膜色素变性中MP-1与汉弗莱视野缺损的比较。
Optom Vis Sci. 2012 Jul;89(7):1050-8. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e31825da18c.
6
Fixation behavior in primary open angle glaucoma at early and moderate stage assessed by the MicroPerimeter MP-1.用 MicroPerimeter MP-1 评估原发性开角型青光眼早期和中期的固视行为。
J Glaucoma. 2013 Feb;22(2):169-73. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0b013e3182311dce.
7
Efficacy of SLO-Microperimetry and Humphrey for evaluating macular sensitivity changes in advanced glaucoma.SLO-Microperimetry 和 Humphrey 评估晚期青光眼黄斑敏感性变化的疗效。
Can J Ophthalmol. 2013 Oct;48(5):406-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jcjo.2013.08.001.
8
Biomechanical Glaucoma Factor and Corneal Hysteresis in Treated Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma and Their Associations With Visual Field Progression.治疗性原发性开角型青光眼的生物力学青光眼因素和角膜滞后及其与视野进展的关系。
Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2021 Jun 1;62(7):4. doi: 10.1167/iovs.62.7.4.
9
Distribution and Rates of Visual Field Loss across Different Disease Stages in Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma.原发性开角型青光眼不同疾病阶段视野缺失的分布和发生率。
Ophthalmol Glaucoma. 2018 Jul-Aug;1(1):52-60. doi: 10.1016/j.ogla.2018.05.005. Epub 2018 Jul 3.
10
Comparing the Performance of Compass Perimetry With Humphrey Field Analyzer in Eyes With Glaucoma.比较指南针视野计与 Humphrey 视野分析仪在青光眼患者眼中的性能。
J Glaucoma. 2017 Mar;26(3):292-297. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000000609.

本文引用的文献

1
Impact of learning effect on reliability factors and global indices in visual field testing by standard automated perimetry in normal healthy subjects and primary open-angle glaucoma patients to obtain an accurate baseline perimetry chart.学习效应对正常健康受试者和原发性开角型青光眼患者标准自动视野计视野测试中的可靠性因素和全局指数的影响,以获得准确的基线视野图。
Indian J Ophthalmol. 2023 Jul;71(7):2739-2745. doi: 10.4103/IJO.IJO_362_23.
2
Diagnostic accuracy of an iPad application for detection of visual field defects.iPad 应用程序检测视野缺损的诊断准确性。
Eye (Lond). 2023 Jun;37(8):1690-1695. doi: 10.1038/s41433-022-02223-y. Epub 2022 Sep 5.
3
Agreement in the detection of chiasmal and postchiasmal visual field defects between imo binocular random single-eye test and Humphrey monocular test.
在使用imo双眼随机单眼测试和Humphrey单眼测试检测视交叉及视交叉后视野缺损方面的一致性。
Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2022 Sep;66(5):413-424. doi: 10.1007/s10384-022-00935-y. Epub 2022 Aug 16.
4
Screening for Glaucoma in Adults: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.成人青光眼筛查:美国预防服务工作组的更新证据报告和系统评价。
JAMA. 2022 May 24;327(20):1998-2012. doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.6290.
5
Classification of Visual Field Abnormalities in Highly Myopic Eyes without Pathologic Change.高度近视而无病理改变眼中的视野异常分类。
Ophthalmology. 2022 Jul;129(7):803-812. doi: 10.1016/j.ophtha.2022.03.001. Epub 2022 Mar 12.
6
Real-World Analysis of the Aging Effects on Visual Field Reliability Indices in Humans.人类视野可靠性指标衰老效应的真实世界分析
J Clin Med. 2021 Dec 9;10(24):5775. doi: 10.3390/jcm10245775.
7
Predicting Global Test-Retest Variability of Visual Fields in Glaucoma.预测青光眼视野的全球测试-再测试变异性。
Ophthalmol Glaucoma. 2021 Jul-Aug;4(4):390-399. doi: 10.1016/j.ogla.2020.12.001. Epub 2020 Dec 11.
8
Altered spatial summation optimizes visual function in axial myopia.轴向近视中空间总和的改变优化了视觉功能。
Sci Rep. 2020 Jul 22;10(1):12179. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-67893-8.
9
Comparison and Correlation of Retinal Sensitivity Between Microperimetry and Standard Automated Perimetry in Low-tension Glaucoma.低眼压性青光眼中小视野计与自动视野计视网膜敏感度的比较与相关性。
J Glaucoma. 2020 Oct;29(10):975-980. doi: 10.1097/IJG.0000000000001599.
10
Detection of Glaucoma Progression in Individuals of African Descent Compared With Those of European Descent.与欧洲裔个体相比,非洲裔个体青光眼进展情况的检测
JAMA Ophthalmol. 2018 Apr 1;136(4):329-335. doi: 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.6836.