Suppr超能文献

青光眼患者与健康对照者前瞻性研究中传统视野检查与高通分辨率视野检查的比较。

Comparison of conventional and high-pass resolution perimetry in a prospective study of patients with glaucoma and healthy controls.

作者信息

Chauhan B C, House P H, McCormick T A, LeBlanc R P

机构信息

Department of Ophthalmology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia.

出版信息

Arch Ophthalmol. 1999 Jan;117(1):24-33. doi: 10.1001/archopht.117.1.24.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether high-pass resolution perimetry detected glaucomatous visual field progression earlier than conventional perimetry.

METHODS

In a prospective longitudinal study, we observed 113 patients with open-angle glaucoma and with early to moderate visual field damage and 119 healthy control subjects. Each subject underwent testing at 6-month intervals using conventional and high-pass resolution perimetry (program 30-2 of the Humphrey Field Analyzer [Humphrey Instruments, Inc, San Leandro, Calif] and the Ring program of the Ophthimus perimeter [Hi-Tech Vision, Göteborg, Sweden], respectively). Our predetermined criterion for progression with conventional perimetry was the presence of at least 4 overlapping nonedge locations outside the fifth percentile for test-retest variability of threshold deviations (defined by the Glaucoma Change Probability Analysis of the Statpac 2 program) in 2 of 3 consecutive visual fields. We employed the identical criterion for progression with high-pass resolution perimetry using our own test-retest variability data. We repeated this procedure in the controls to measure the false-positive rate of progression.

RESULTS

Patients were observed for a median of 4.5 years and 11 examinations with each technique. Fifty-seven patients (50.4%) did not show progression with either technique. Twenty-four patients (21.2%) showed progression with high-pass resolution perimetry alone, whereas 6 (5.3%) showed progression with conventional perimetry alone. Of the remaining 26 patients (23.0%) who showed progression with both techniques, 14 (54%) showed progression with high-pass resolution perimetry first (median, 12 months earlier); 5 (19%), with conventional perimetry first (median, 6 months earlier); and 7 (27%), with both techniques at the same time. Controls were observed for a median of 5 years and 11 examinations with each technique. One control (0.8%) showed progression with high-pass resolution perimetry.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that high-pass resolution perimetry detects glaucomatous visual field progression earlier than conventional perimetry in most patients with progression.

摘要

目的

确定高通分辨率视野检查法是否比传统视野检查法能更早检测出青光眼性视野进展。

方法

在一项前瞻性纵向研究中,我们观察了113例开角型青光眼且有早期至中度视野损害的患者以及119名健康对照者。每位受试者每隔6个月分别使用传统视野检查法和高通分辨率视野检查法进行检测(分别使用Humphrey视野分析仪[Humphrey Instruments, Inc, 加利福尼亚州圣莱安德罗]的30 - 2程序和Ophthimus周边视野计[Hi-Tech Vision, 瑞典哥德堡]的环形程序)。我们采用传统视野检查法时预先设定的进展标准是,在连续3次视野检查中的2次检查里,阈值偏差的重测变异性(由Statpac 2程序的青光眼变化概率分析定义)处于第5百分位数之外至少有4个重叠的非边缘位置。对于高通分辨率视野检查法,我们使用自己的重测变异性数据采用相同的进展标准。我们在对照组中重复此过程以测量进展的假阳性率。

结果

患者接受每种技术检查的中位时间为4.5年,检查11次。57例患者(50.4%)两种技术检查均未显示进展。24例患者(21.2%)仅高通分辨率视野检查法显示进展,而6例患者(5.3%)仅传统视野检查法显示进展。在其余26例(23.0%)两种技术检查均显示进展的患者中,14例(54%)首先是高通分辨率视野检查法显示进展(中位时间早12个月);5例(19%)首先是传统视野检查法显示进展(中位时间早6个月);7例(27%)两种技术检查同时显示进展。对照组接受每种技术检查的中位时间为5年,检查11次。1例对照者(0.8%)高通分辨率视野检查法显示进展。

结论

我们的结果表明,在大多数有进展的患者中,高通分辨率视野检查法比传统视野检查法能更早检测出青光眼性视野进展。

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