Hudson C, Flanagan J G, Turner G S, Chen H C, Young L B, McLeod D
University Department of Ophthalmology, Manchester Royal Eye Hospital, UK.
Diabetologia. 1998 Aug;41(8):918-28. doi: 10.1007/s001250051008.
The aim of the study was to compare the sensitivity of short-wavelength and conventional automated static threshold perimetry for the psychophysical detection of abnormality in patients with clinically significant diabetic macular oedema. The sample comprised 24 patients with clinically significant diabetic macular oedema (mean age 59.75 years, range 45-75 years). One eye of each patient was selected. Exclusion criteria included the presence of lenticular opacity. The sensitivity of the macular visual field of each patient was determined with programme 10-2 of the Humphrey Field Analyser on two occasions, using both short-wavelength and conventional stimulus parameters; the results of the second session were analysed to minimise learning effects. A pointwise horizontal hemifield asymmetry analysis was derived for short-wavelength perimetry (thereby negating the influence of pre-receptoral absorption); the pointwise pattern deviation probability plot was analysed for conventional perimetry. Abnormality was defined as 3 or more contiguous stimulus locations with negative asymmetries (short-wavelength) or reduced sensitivity values (conventional) that resulted in a statistical probability level of p less than 0.05. The fields of 8 patients were abnormal as assessed by conventional perimetry while all were classified as abnormal using short-wavelength perimetry. In the 8 patients who exhibited both abnormal conventional and abnormal short-wavelength perimetry results, the extent of field loss was generally greater using short-wavelength perimetry. The position of the localised field loss (i.e. as distinct from field loss that was generalised across the visual field) assessed by short-wavelength perimetry corresponded with the clinical mapping of the area of diabetic macular oedema but the extent of this loss was generally greater than that suggested by clinical assessment. Short-wavelength automated perimetry offers improved sensitivity for the psychophysical detection of clinically significant diabetic macular oedema.
该研究的目的是比较短波长自动静态阈值视野检查法与传统自动静态阈值视野检查法对临床上有意义的糖尿病性黄斑水肿患者异常情况的心理物理学检测敏感性。样本包括24例临床上有意义的糖尿病性黄斑水肿患者(平均年龄59.75岁,范围45 - 75岁)。选取每位患者的一只眼睛。排除标准包括晶状体混浊。使用Humphrey视野分析仪的程序10 - 2,分别采用短波长和传统刺激参数,对每位患者的黄斑视野敏感性进行两次测定;分析第二次检查的结果以尽量减少学习效应。对短波长视野检查进行逐点水平半视野不对称性分析(从而消除感受器前吸收的影响);对传统视野检查分析逐点模式偏差概率图。异常定义为连续3个或更多刺激位点出现负向不对称(短波长)或敏感性值降低(传统),导致统计概率水平p小于0.05。经传统视野检查评估,8例患者的视野异常,而使用短波长视野检查时所有患者均被归类为异常。在8例传统视野检查和短波长视野检查结果均异常的患者中,短波长视野检查的视野缺损范围通常更大。短波长视野检查所评估的局限性视野缺损位置(即与整个视野普遍存在的视野缺损不同)与糖尿病性黄斑水肿区域的临床定位相符,但这种缺损程度通常大于临床评估所示。短波长自动视野检查法对临床上有意义的糖尿病性黄斑水肿的心理物理学检测具有更高的敏感性。