Prediction of visual field defects on standard automated perimetry by screening C-20-1 frequency doubling technology perimetry

Journal of Glaucoma

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 35-39

  Kamantigue, Maria E G ^a   Joson, Peter J ^a   Chen, Philip P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Frequency doubling technology; Glaucoma; Glaucoma suspect; Ocular hypertension; Perimetry

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AUTOMATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; KAPLAN MEIER METHOD; MALE; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; PERIMETRY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCREENING; SURVIVAL; VISUAL FIELD DEFECT;

AGED; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA, OPEN-ANGLE; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OCULAR HYPERTENSION; PERIMETRY; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; VISION DISORDERS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 30344441495     PISSN: 10570829     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.ijg.0000196621.41991.ff     Document Type: Review

References (37)

1. Quigley H, Dunkelberger G, Green WR. Retinal ganglion cell atrophy correlated with automated perimetry in human eyes with glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 1989:453-464.
2. Kerrigan-Baumrind LA, Quigley HA, Pease ME, et al. Number of ganglion cells in glaucoma eyes compared with threshold visual field tests in the same persons. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:741-748.
3. Sommer A, Katz J, Quigley HA, et al. Clinical detectable nerve fiber atrophy precedes the onset of glaucomatous visual field loss. Arch Ophthalmol. 1991;109:77-83.
4. Kelley DH. Frequency doubling in visual responses. J Opt Soc Am. 1966;56:1628-1633.
5. Maddess T, Henry GH. Performance of nonlinear visual units in ocular hypertension and glaucoma. Clin Vis Sci. 1992;7:371-383.
6. Anderson R, O'Brien C. Psychophysical evidence for a selective loss of M ganglion cells in glaucoma. Vision Res. 1997;37:1079-1083.
7. Quigley H, Dunkelberger G, Green R. Chronic human glaucoma causing selectively greater loss of large optic nerve fibers. Ophthalmology. 1988;95:357-363.
8. Weber AJ, Kaufman PJ, Hubbard WC. Morphology of single ganglion cells in the glaucomatous primate retina. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1998;39:365-370.
9. Sample PA, Bosworth CF, Blumenthal EZ, et al. Visual function-specific perimetry for indirect comparison of different ganglion cell populations in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:1783-1790.
10. Yucel YH, Zhang Q, Weinreb RN, et al. Atrophy of relay neurons in magno- and parvocellular layers in the lateral geniculate nucleus in experimental glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:3216-3222.
11. Martin L, Wanger P, Vancea L, et al. Concordance of high-pass resolution perimetry and frequency doubling technology perimetry results in glaucoma: no support for selective ganglion cell damage. J Glaucoma. 2003;12:40-44.
12. White AJR, Sun H, Swanson WH, et al. An examination of physiological mechanisms underlying the frequency-doubling illusion. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2002;43:3590-3599.
13. Spry PGD, Johnson CA, Mansberger SL, et al. Psychophysical investigation of ganglion cell loss in early glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 2005;14:11-19.
14. Johnson CA, Adams AJ, Casson EJ, et al. Blue-on-yellow perimetry can predict the development of glaucomatous visual field loss. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993;113:645-650.
15. Chauhan BC, House PH, McCormick TA, et al. Comparison of conventional and high-pass resolution perimetry in a prospective study of patients with glaucoma and healthy controls. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:24-33.
16. Sample PA, Taylor JD, Martinez GA, et al. Short-wavelength color visual fields in glaucoma suspects at risk. Am J Ophthalmol. 1993;115:225-233.
17. Yamada N, Chen PP, Mills RP, et al. Screening for glaucoma with frequency-doubling technology and Damato campimetry. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:1479-1484.
18. Anderson DR. Automated Static Perimetry. St. Louis: CV Mosby; 1992:91-137.
19. Chen PP. Correlation of visual field progression between eyes in patients with chronic open-angle glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2002;109:2093-2099.
20. Harbin TS, Podos SM, Kolker AE, et al. Visual field progression in open-angle glaucoma patients presenting with monocular field loss. Trans Am Acad Ophthalmol Otolaryngol. 1976;81:253-257.
21. FDT visual field instrument user's guide. Humphrey Instruments; San Leandro, CA: 1998.
22. Paczka JA, Friedman DS, Quigley HA, et al. Diagnostic capabilities of frequency doubling technology, scanning laser polarimetry, and nerve fiber layer photographs to distinguish glaucomatous damage. Am J Ophthalmol. 2001;131:188-197.
23. Patel SC, Friedman DS, Varadkar P, et al. Algorithm for interpreting the results of frequency doubling perimetry. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;129:323-327.
24. Burnstein Y, Ellish NJ, Madbalon M, et al. Comparison of frequency doubling perimetry with Humphrey visual field analysis in a glaucoma practice. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;129:328-333.
25. Trible JR, Schultz RO, Robinson JC, et al. Accuracy of glaucoma detection with frequency-doubling perimetry. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;129:740-745.
26. Wadood AC, Azuara-Blanco A, Aspinall P, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of frequency-doubling technology, tendency-oriented perimetry, and Humphrey Swedish interactive threshold algorithm-fast perimetry in a glaucoma practice. Am J Ophthalmol. 2002;133:327-332.
27. Quigley HA. Identification of glaucoma-related visual field abnormality with the screening protocol of frequency doubling technology. Am J Ophthalmol. 1998;125:819-829.
28. Khong JJ, Dimitrov PN, Rait J, et al. Can the specificity of the FDT for glaucoma be improved by confirming abnormal results? J Glaucoma. 2001;10:199-202.
29. Medeiros FA, Sample PA, Weinreb RN. Frequency doubling technology perimetry abnormalities as predictors of glaucomatous visual field loss. Am J Ophthalmol. 2004;137:863-871.
30. Landers JA, Goldberg I, Graham SL. Detection of early visual field loss in glaucoma using frequency-doubling perimetry and short-wavelength automated perimetry. Arch Ophthalmol. 2003;121:1705-1710.
31. Bayer AU, Erb C. Short wavelength automated perimetry, frequency doubling technology perimetry, and pattern electroretinography for prediction of progressive glaucomatous standard visual field defects. Ophthalmology. 2002;109:1009-1017.
32. Iester M, Capris P, Pandolfo A, et al. Learning effect, short-term fluctuation, and long-term fluctuation in frequency doubling technique. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;130:160-164.
33. Joson PJ, Kamantigue MEG, Chen PP. Learning effects among perimetric novices in frequency doubling technology perimetry. Ophthalmology. 2002;109:757-760.
34. Brush MB, Chen PP. Test-retest variability in glaucoma patients tested with C-20-1 screening-mode frequency doubling technology perimetry. J Glaucoma. 2004;13:273-277.
35. Johnson C, Samuels S. Screening for glaucomatous visual field loss with frequency-doubling perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1997;38:413-425.
36. Cello KE, Nelson-Quigg JM, Johnson CA. Frequency doubling technology perimetry for detection of glaucomatous visual field loss. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;129:314-322.
37. Brush MB, Chen PP. Learning effect among perimetric novices with screening C-20-1 Frequency Doubling Technology perimetry. Am J Ophthalmol. 2004;137:551-552.