Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Humphrey matrix frequency doubling perimetry for detection of visual-field defects in open-angle glaucoma.
Br J Ophthalmol. 2009 May; 93(5):582-8.BJ

Abstract

AIM

Matrix perimetry uses frequency-doubling technology (FDT) incorporated into a 5 degrees test target. This permits testing of the same number of locations within a defined visual field as standard automated perimetry (SAP) and may improve performance compared with original FDT perimetry. This study investigates the performance of Humphrey Matrix perimetry for detecting glaucomatous visual-field loss.

DESIGN

Prospective case control study.

METHODS

We recruited 115 participants with glaucomatous visual-field loss and 33 normal controls from an urban glaucoma practice. Each participant performed SITA 24-2 SAP then threshold 24-2 Matrix perimetry. Severity of visual-field loss was defined using SAP mean deviation (MD) as early (MD >-6 dB), moderate (MD -6 to -12 dB) or advanced (MD <-12 dB). The sensitivity and specificity of Humphrey Matrix perimetry were calculated for different automated indices.

RESULTS

The matrix perimetry sensitivity and specificity were up to 100% for moderate and advanced glaucomatous visual-field loss. A receiver operator characteristic area under the curve (AUC) analysis revealed MD to be slightly better than pattern standard deviation (PSD) for defining moderate (AUC: MD 0.997; PSD 0.987) and advanced defects (AUC: MD 1.000; PSD 0.987). Matrix was less sensitive (up to 87.3%) for detecting early glaucomatous visual-field loss compared with SITA 24-2 SAP (AUC: PSD 0.948; MD 0.910).

CONCLUSIONS

Matrix perimetry is excellent for detection of moderate to advanced glaucomatous visual-field loss but may miss some early defects. It may be well suited to following progression of early to moderate field loss because of a smaller target size compared with original FDT perimetry.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Sydney Eye Hospital, Sydney, Australia. colinc1@gmp.usyd.edu.auNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Evaluation Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

18669543

Citation

Clement, C I., et al. "Humphrey Matrix Frequency Doubling Perimetry for Detection of Visual-field Defects in Open-angle Glaucoma." The British Journal of Ophthalmology, vol. 93, no. 5, 2009, pp. 582-8.
Clement CI, Goldberg I, Healey PR, et al. Humphrey matrix frequency doubling perimetry for detection of visual-field defects in open-angle glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2009;93(5):582-8.
Clement, C. I., Goldberg, I., Healey, P. R., & Graham, S. (2009). Humphrey matrix frequency doubling perimetry for detection of visual-field defects in open-angle glaucoma. The British Journal of Ophthalmology, 93(5), 582-8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2007.119909
Clement CI, et al. Humphrey Matrix Frequency Doubling Perimetry for Detection of Visual-field Defects in Open-angle Glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2009;93(5):582-8. PubMed PMID: 18669543.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Humphrey matrix frequency doubling perimetry for detection of visual-field defects in open-angle glaucoma. AU - Clement,C I, AU - Goldberg,I, AU - Healey,P R, AU - Graham,S, Y1 - 2008/07/31/ PY - 2008/8/2/pubmed PY - 2009/5/28/medline PY - 2008/8/2/entrez SP - 582 EP - 8 JF - The British journal of ophthalmology JO - Br J Ophthalmol VL - 93 IS - 5 N2 - AIM: Matrix perimetry uses frequency-doubling technology (FDT) incorporated into a 5 degrees test target. This permits testing of the same number of locations within a defined visual field as standard automated perimetry (SAP) and may improve performance compared with original FDT perimetry. This study investigates the performance of Humphrey Matrix perimetry for detecting glaucomatous visual-field loss. DESIGN: Prospective case control study. METHODS: We recruited 115 participants with glaucomatous visual-field loss and 33 normal controls from an urban glaucoma practice. Each participant performed SITA 24-2 SAP then threshold 24-2 Matrix perimetry. Severity of visual-field loss was defined using SAP mean deviation (MD) as early (MD >-6 dB), moderate (MD -6 to -12 dB) or advanced (MD <-12 dB). The sensitivity and specificity of Humphrey Matrix perimetry were calculated for different automated indices. RESULTS: The matrix perimetry sensitivity and specificity were up to 100% for moderate and advanced glaucomatous visual-field loss. A receiver operator characteristic area under the curve (AUC) analysis revealed MD to be slightly better than pattern standard deviation (PSD) for defining moderate (AUC: MD 0.997; PSD 0.987) and advanced defects (AUC: MD 1.000; PSD 0.987). Matrix was less sensitive (up to 87.3%) for detecting early glaucomatous visual-field loss compared with SITA 24-2 SAP (AUC: PSD 0.948; MD 0.910). CONCLUSIONS: Matrix perimetry is excellent for detection of moderate to advanced glaucomatous visual-field loss but may miss some early defects. It may be well suited to following progression of early to moderate field loss because of a smaller target size compared with original FDT perimetry. SN - 1468-2079 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/18669543/Humphrey_matrix_frequency_doubling_perimetry_for_detection_of_visual_field_defects_in_open_angle_glaucoma_ L2 - https://bjo.bmj.com/lookup/pmidlookup?view=long&amp;pmid=18669543 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -