Comparison of objective diagnostic tests in glaucoma: Heidelberg retinal tomography and multifocal visual evoked potentials

Journal of Glaucoma

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 110-116

  Balachandran, C ^a   Graham, S L ^a,b   Klistorner, A ^a,b,c   Goldberg, I ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b ObjectiVision Pty Ltd   (Australia)

^c SYDNEY EYE HOSPITAL   (Australia)

Author keywords

Glaucoma; Optic nerve head; Visual evoked potential; Visual field

Indexed keywords

ACCUMAP SEVERITY INDEX; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; EVOKED VISUAL RESPONSE; FEMALE; FUNCTION TEST; GLAUCOMA; HEIDELBERG RETINA TOMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; HUMPHREY VISUAL FIELD PERIMETRY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MALE; MATHEMATICAL VARIABLE; MEAN DEVIATION; MOORFIELD REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MULTIFOCAL EVOKED VISUAL RESPONSE; NERVE FUNCTION; OPTIC NERVE; PERIMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; ROC CURVE; SCORING SYSTEM; SCOTOMA; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY; VISUAL FIELD;

AGED; AREA UNDER CURVE; DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES, OPHTHALMOLOGICAL; EVOKED POTENTIALS, VISUAL; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OPTIC DISK; OPTIC NERVE DISEASES; RETINA; ROC CURVE; SCOTOMA; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 33646794639     PISSN: 10570829     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00061198-200604000-00006     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Iester M, Mikelberg FS, Courtright P, et al. Correlation between the visual field indices and Heidelberg retina tomograph parameters. J Glaucoma. 1997;6:78-82.
2. Mardin CY, Horn FK, Jonas JB et al. Preperimetric glaucoma diagnosis by confocal scanning laser tomography of the optic disc. Br J Ophthalmol. 1999;83:299-304.
3. Iester M, De Ferrari R, Zanini M. Topographic analysis to discriminate glaucomatous from normal optic nerve heads with a confocal scanning laser: new optic disk analysis without any observer input. Surv Ophthalmol. 1999; 44:S33-S40.
4. Mikelberg FS, Parfitt CM, Swindale NV, et al. Ability of the Heidelberg Retinal Tomograph to detect early glaucomatous visual field loss. J Glaucoma. 1995;4:242-247.
5. Wollstein G, Garway-Heath DF, Hitchings RA. Identification of early glaucoma cases with the scanning laser ophthalmoscope. Ophthalmology 1998;105:1557-1563.
6. Miglior S, Casula M, Guareschi M, et al. Clinical ability of Heidelberg retinal tomograph examination to detect glaucomatous visual field changes. Ophthalmology 2001;108:1621-1627.
7. Chauhan BCP, McCormick TABA. Nicolela MTMD, et al. Optic disc and visual field changes in a prospective longitudinal study of patients with glaucoma: Comparison of scanning laser tomography with conventional perimetry and optic disc photography. Arch Ophthalmol. 2001;119:1492-1499.
8. Kamal DS, Garway-Heath DF, Hitchings RA, et al. Use of sequential Heidelberg retina tomograph images to identify changes at the optic disc in ocular hypertensive patients at risk of developing glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol. 2000;84:993-998.
9. Yucel YHMDP, Gupta NMDP, Kalichman MWP, et al. Relationship of optic disc topography to optic nerve fiber number in glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1998;116:493-497.
10. 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.
11. Anton A, Yamagishi N, Zangwill L, et al. Mapping structural to functional damage in glaucoma with standard automated perimetry and confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy. Am J Ophthalmol. 1998;125:436-446.
12. Bartz-Schmidt KU, Thumann G, Jonescu-Cuypers CP, et al. Quantitative morphologic and functional evaluation of the optic nerve head in chronic open-angle glaucoma. Surv Ophthalmol. 1999;44:41-52.
13. Quigley HA, Dunkelberger GR, Green WR. Retinal ganglion cell atrophy correlated with automated perimetry in human eyes with glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 1989;107:453-464.
14. Baseler HA, Sutter EE, Klein SA, et al. The topography of visual evoked response properties across the visual field. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1994;90:65-81.
15. Klistorner AI, Graham SL, Grigg JR. et al. Multifocal topographic visual evoked potential: improving objective detection of local visual field defects. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1998;39:937-950.
16. Graham SL, Klistorner A, Grigg JR, et al. Objective VEP perimetry in glaucoma: asymmetry analysis to identify early deficits. J Glaucoma. 2000;9:10-19.
17. Hood DC. Assessing retinal function with the multifocal technique. Prog Retinal Eye Res. 2000;19:607-646.
18. Goldberg I. Graham SL, Klistorner A. Multifocal objective perimetry in the detection of glaucomatous field loss. Am J Ophthalmol. 2002;133:29-39.
19. Graham SL, Klistorner A, Goldberg I. Clinical application of objective perimetry using multifocal VEP in glaucoma practice. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123:729-739.
20. Klistorner A, Graham SL. Electroencephalogram-based scaling of multifocal visual evoked potentials: effect on intersubject amplitude variability. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:2145-2152.
21. Klistorner A, Graham SL. Objective perimetry in glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2000;107:2283-2299.
22. Garway-Heath DF, Poinoosawmy D, Fitzke F, et al. Mapping the visual field to the optic disc in normal tension glaucoma eyes. Ophthalmology. 2000;107:1809-1815.
23. Greenstein VC, Thienprasiddhi P, Ritch R, et al. A method for comparing electrophysiological, psychophysical, and structural measures of glaucomatous damage. Arch Ophthalmol. 2004;122:1276-1284.