Stabilization and comparison of TOP and Bracketing perimetric strategies using a threshold spatial filter

Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology

Volumn 245, Issue 9, 2007, Pages 1303-1309

  Gonzalez de la Rosa, Manuel ^a,b   Gonzalez Hernandez, Marta ^a,b   Diaz Aleman, Tinguaro ^a,b   Sanchez Mendez, Manuel ^a,b  

^a HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARIO DE CANARIAS   (Spain)

^b NONE   (Spain)

Author keywords

Filters; Glaucoma; Perimetry; Threshold; Visual field

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED PERIMETRY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; FILTRATION; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PERIMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL SYSTEM EXAMINATION; VISUAL THRESHOLD;

CHRONIC DISEASE; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA, OPEN-ANGLE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERIMETRY; SCOTOMA; SENSORY THRESHOLDS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 34548017867     PISSN: 0721832X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00417-007-0538-0     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Anderson AJ (2003) Spatial resolution of the tendency-oriented perimetry algorithm. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 44:1962-1968
2. Asman P, Wild JM, Heijl A (2004) Appearance of the pattern deviation map as a function of change in area of localized field loss. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 45:3099-3106
3. Bebie H, Flammer J, Bebie T (1989) The cumulative defect curve: separation of local and diffuse components of visual field damage. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 227:9-12
4. Bengtsson B, Olsson J, Heijl A, Rootzen H (1997) A new generation of algorithms for computerized threshold perimetry, SITA. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 75:368-375
5. Bland JM, Altman DG (1995) Comparing methods of measurement: Why plotting difference against standard method is misleading. Lancet 346:1085-1087, 21;346:1085-1087
6. Fitzke FW, Crabb DP, McNaught AI, Edgar DF, Hitchings RA (1995) Image processing of computerised visual field data. Br J Ophthalmol 79:207-212
7. Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA, Poinoosawmy D, McNaught AI, Crabb DP (1996) Analysis of visual field progression in glaucoma. Br J Ophthalmol 80:40-48
8. Flammer J, Drance SM, Zulauf M (1984) Differential light threshold. Short-and long-term fluctuation in patients with glaucoma, normal controls, and patients with suspected glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 102:704-706
9. Flanagan J, Wild J, Trope G (1983) Evaluation of FASTPAC, a new strategy for thresholds estimation with the Humphrey field analyzer, in a glaucomatous population. Ophthalmology 100:949-954
10. Funkhouser A, Fankhauser F, Hirsbrunner H (1989) A comparison of three methods for abbreviating G1 examinations. Jpn J Ophthalmol 33:288-294
11. Funkhouser A, Fankhauser F, Hirsbrunner H (1989) A comparison of eight test location configurations for estimating G1 mean defect values. Jpn J Ophthalmol 33:295-299
12. Gardiner SK, Crabb DP, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA (2004) Reducing noise in suspected glaucomatous visual fields by using a new spatial filter. Vision Res 44:839-848
13. Gonzalez de la Rosa M, Abreu Reyes J, Gonzalez Sierra M (1990) Rapid assessment of the visual field in glaucoma using an analysis based on multiple correlations. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 228:387-391
14. Gonzalez de la Rosa M, Pareja A (1997) Influence of the "fatigue effect" on the mean deviation measurement in perimetry. Eur J Ophthalmol 7:29-34
15. Gonzalez de la Rosa M, Martinez A, Sanchez M, Mesa C, Cordoves L, Losada MJ (1997) Accuracy of the Tendency Oriented Perimetry (TOP) in the Octopus 1-2-3 Perimeter. In: Wall M, Wild J (eds) Perimetry update 1996/ 1997. Kugler, Amsterdam, pp 119-123
16. Gonzalez de la Rosa M, Gonzalez Hernandez M, Abraldes M, Azuara-Blanco A (2002) Quantification of inter-point topographic correlations of threshold values in glaucomatous visual fields. J Glaucoma 11:30-34
17. Gonzalez de la Rosa M, Gonzalez-Hernandez M, Garcia-Feijoo J, Morales J, Azuara-Blanco A (2006) Diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility of Tendency Oriented Perimetry in glaucoma. Eur J Ophthalmol 16:259-267
18. Gonzalez-Hernandez M, Morales J, Azuara-Blanco A, Garcia Sanchez J, Gonzalez de la Rosa M (2005) Comparison of diagnostic ability between a fast strategy, Tendency Oriented Perimetry (TOP) and the standard bracketing strategy. Ophthalmologica 219:373-378
19. Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD, Heuer DK, Higginbotham EJ, Johnson CA et al (2002) The ocular hypertension treatment study II. Arch Ophthalmol 120:714-720
20. Heijl A, Drance SM (1983) Changes in differential threshold in patients with glaucoma during prolonged perimetry. Br J Ophthalmol 67:512-516
21. Heijl A, Lindgren G, Olsson J (1987) A package for the statistical analysis of visual fields. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser 49:153-168
22. Johnson CA, Adams CW, Lewis RA (1988) Fatigue effects in automated perimetry. Appl Optics 27:1030-1037
23. Kass MA, Heuer DK, Higginbotham EJ, Johnson CA, Keltner JL, Miller JP et al. (2002) The ocular hypertension treatment study I. Arch Ophthalmol 120:701-713
24. Krakau C (1989) Visual field testing with reduced sets of test points. A computerised analysis. Doc Ophthalmol 73:71-80
25. Maeda H, Nakaura M, Negi A (2000) New perimetric threshold test algorithm with dynamic strategy and tendency oriented perimetry (TOP) in glaucomatous eyes. Eye 5:747-751
26. Morales J, Weitzman M, Gonzalez de la Rosa M (2000) A preliminary comparison between Tendency Oriented Perimetry (TOP) and traditional threshold perimetry. Ophthalmology 107:134-142
27. Sturmer J, Gloor B, Tobler HJ (1984) Wie sehen Glaukomgesichtsfelder wirklich aus? Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 184:390-393
28. Vedy J, Queguiner P, Mouly A, Lagrange C, Riviere B (1990) Le score perimetrique dans l'aire de Bjerrum. Ophtalmologie 4:295-297
29. Zulauf M, Fehlmann P, Flammer J (1995) Efficiency of the standard Octopus bracketing procedure compared to that of the "Dynamic strategy" of Weber. In: Wall M, Wild J (eds) Perimetry update 1994/ 1995. Kugler, New York, pp 263-264