Rapid pupil-based assessment of glaucomatous damage

Optometry and Vision Science

Volumn 85, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 471-481

  Chen, Yanjun ^a   Wyatt, Harry J ^a,b   Swanson, William H ^a   Dul, Mitchell W ^a  

^a STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

Glaucoma; Pupillary light reflex; RAPD; Retina

Indexed keywords

GLAUCOMA; MIRROR IMAGES; OPTIC NEUROPATHIES; PATIENT POPULATION; PUPIL DIAMETER; PUPILLARY LIGHT REFLEX; PUPILLOMETRY; RAPD; RAPID METHOD; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS; RELATIVE SENSITIVITY; RESPONSE AMPLITUDES; RETINA; VISUAL FIELD DEFECTS; VISUAL FIELDS; VISUAL FUNCTIONS;

DAMAGE DETECTION; VISION;

ALDEHYDES;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CONTRAST; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; MALE; OPTIC NERVE DISEASE; PERIMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUPIL REFLEX; PUPILLOMETRY; RETINA; STIMULUS RESPONSE; VISION; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL IMPAIRMENT; VISUAL STIMULATION; CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; OPTIC NERVE; PATHOLOGY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PUPIL; PUPIL DISEASE;

CONTRAST SENSITIVITY; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; OPTIC NERVE; PUPIL; PUPIL DISORDERS; RETINA; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 48549089638     PISSN: 10405488     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0b013e318177ec02     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Lowenstein O, Loewenfeld IE. The pupil. In: Davson H, ed. The Eye, 2nd ed. New York: Academic Press; 1969:255-337.
2. Levatin P. Pupillary escape in disease of the retina or optic nerve. Arch Ophthalmol 1959;62:768-79.
3. Anderson DR. Standard perimetry. Ophthalmol Clin North Am 2003;16:205-12, vi.
4. Chen Y, Wyatt HJ, Swanson WH. Pupillary evaluation of retinal asymmetry: development and initial testing of a technique. Vision Res 2005;45:2549-63.
5. Aulhorn E, Karmeyer H. Frequency distribution in early glaucomatous visual field defects. In: Greve EL, ed. Documental Ophthalmologica Proceedings Series, vol 14. The Hague: W. Junk; 1977:75-83.
6. Hart WM Jr, Becker B. The onset and evolution of glaucomatous visual field defects. Ophthalmology 1982;89:268-79.
7. Asman P, Heijl A. Glaucoma Hemifield test. Automated visual field evaluation. Arch Ophthalmol 1992;110:812-19.
8. Katz J, Quigley HA, Sommer A. Repeatability of the glaucoma hemifield test in automated perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1995; 36:1658-64.
9. Garway-Heath DF, Holder GE, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA. Relationship between electrophysiological, psychophysical, and anatomical measurements in glaucoma. Invest Opthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43: 2213-20.
10. Hood DC, Greenstein VC, Odel JG, Zhang X, Ritch R, Liebmann JM, Hong JE, Chen CS, Thienprasiddhi P. Visual field defects and multifocal visual evoked potentials: evidence of a linear relationship. Arch Ophthalmol 2002;120:1672-81.
11. Press WH, Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT, Flannery BP. Numerical Recipes in Fortran. The Art of Scientific Computing, 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press; 1993.
12. Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res 1999;8:135-60.
13. Haas A, Flammer J, Schneider U. Influence of age on the visual fields of normal subjects. Am J Ophthalmol 1986;101:199-203.
14. Heijl A, Lindgren G, Olsson J. Normal variability of static perimetric threshold values across the central visual field. Arch Ophthalmol 1987;105:1544-9.
15. Jaffe GJ, Alvarado JA, Juster RP. Age-related changes of the normal visual field. Arch Ophthalmol 1986;104:1021-5.
16. Lachenmayr BJ, Kojetinsky S, Vivell PM. Is there an accelerated loss at older age for normal sensitivity in the central visual field? In: Mills RP, Wall M, eds. Perimetry Update 1994/1995: Proceedings of the XIth International Perimetric Society Meeting, Washington, DC, USA, July 3-7, 1994. Amsterdam: Kugler Publications; 1994:49-56.
17. Spry PG, Johnson CA. Senescent changes of the normal visual field: an age-old problem. Optom Vis Sci 2001;78:436-41.
18. Brindley GS, Westheimer G. The spatial properties of the human electroretinogram. J Physiol 1965;179:518-37.
19. Choplin NT, Sherwood MB, Spaeth GL. The effect of stimulus size on the measured threshold values in automated perimetry. Ophthalmology 1990;97:371-4.
20. Fellman RL, Lynn JR, Starita RJ, Swanson WH. Clinical importance of spatial summation in glaucoma. In: Heijl A. Perimetry Update, 1988/89: Proceedings of the VIIIth International Perimetric Society Meeting, Vancouver (Canada), May 9-12, 1988. Amsterdam: Kugler & Ghedini; 1989:313-24.
21. Gramer E, Kontic D, Krieglstein GK. [Computer perimetry of glaucomatous visual field defects at different stimulus sizes (author's transl)]. Ophthalmologica 1981;183:162-7.
22. Wilensky JT, Mermelstein JR, Siegel HG. The use of different-sized stimuli in automated perimetry. Am J Ophthalmol 1986;101: 710-13.
23. Zulauf M, Caprioli J. [Indications for stimulus 3 and 5 in automatic perimetry. Preliminary results]. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 1994; 204:407-8.
24. Heijl A, Lindgren A, Lindgren G. Test-retest variability in glaucomatous visual fields. Am J Ophthalmol 1989;108:130-5.
25. Chauhan BC, Johnson CA. Test-retest variability of frequency-doubling perimetry and conventional perimetry in glaucoma patients and normal subjects. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1999;40:648-56.
26. Flammer J, Drance SM, Zulauf M. Differential light threshold. Short- and long-term fluctuation in patients with glaucoma, normal controls, and patients with suspected glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 1984;102:704-6.
27. Spry PG, Johnson CA, McKendrick AM, Turpin A. Variability components of standard automated perimetry and frequency-doubling technology perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2001;42:1404-10.
28. Wild JM, Moss ID, Whitaker D, O'Neill EC. The statistical interpretation of blue-on-yellow visual field loss. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1995;36:1398-410.
29. Piltz JR, Starita RJ. Test-retest variability in glaucomatous visual fields. Am J Ophthalmol 1990;109:109-11.
30. Gilpin LB, Stewart WC, Hunt HH, Broom CD. Threshold variability using different Goldmann stimulus sizes. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1990;68:674-6.
31. Wall M, Kutzko KE, Chauhan BC. Variability in patients with glaucomatous visual field damage is reduced using size V stimuli. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1997;38:426-35.
32. Sun H, Dul MW, Swanson WH. Linearity can account for the similarity among conventional, frequency-doubling, and gabor-based perimetric tests in the glaucomatous macula. Optom Vis Sci 2006;83: 455-65.
33. Pan F, Swanson WH, Dul MW. Evaluation of a two-stage neural model of glaucomatous defect: an approach to reduce test-retest variability. Optom Vis Sci 2006;83:499-511.
34. Artes PH, Hutchison DM, Nicolela MT, LeBlanc RP, Chauhan BC. Threshold and variability properties of matrix frequency-doubling technology and standard automated perimetry in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2005;46:2451-7.
35. Johnson CA, Samuels SJ. Screening for glaucomatous visual field loss with frequency-doubling perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1997;38:413-25.
36. Pearson P, Swanson WH, Fellman RL. Chromatic and achromatic defects in patients with progressing glaucoma. Vision Res 2001;41: 1215-27.
37. Pearson PM, Schmidt LA, Ly-Schroeder E, Swanson WH. Ganglion cell loss and age-related visual loss: a cortical pooling analysis. Optom Vis Sci 2006;83:444-54.
38. Yang A, Swanson WH. A new pattern electroretinogram paradigm evaluated in terms of user friendliness and agreement with perimetry. Ophthalmology 2007;114:671-9.
39. Artes PH, Iwase A, Ohno Y, Kitazawa Y, Chauhan BC. Properties of perimetric threshold estimates from full threshold, SITA Standard, and SITA Fast strategies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43: 2654-9.
40. Felius J, Swanson WH, Fellman RL, Lynn JR, Starita RJ. Spatial summation for selected ganglion cell mosaics in patients with glaucoma. In: Wall M, ed. Perimetry Update 1996/1997: Proceedings of the XIIth International Perimetric Society Meeting; Weurzburg, Germany, June 4-8, 1996. Amsterdam: Kugler Publications; 1996: 213-21.
41. Demirel S, Vingrys A. Fixational instability during perimetry and the blindspot monitor. In: Mills RP, ed. Perimetry Update 1992/1993: Proceedings of the Xth International Perimetric Society Meeting. Amsterdam: Kugler Publications; 1993:515-20.
42. Wyatt HJ, Dul MW, Swanson WH. Variability of visual field measurements is correlated with the gradient of visual sensitivity. Vision Res 2007;47:925-36.
43. Loewenfeld IE. The Pupil: Anatomy, Physiology, and Clinical Applications. Detroit: Wayne State University Press; 1993.
44. Rodieck RW, Watanabe M. Survey of the morphology of macaque retinal ganglion cells that project to the pretectum, superior colliculus, and parvicellular laminae of the lateral geniculate nucleus. J Comp Neurol 1993;338:289-303.
45. Peterson BB, Dacey DM. Morphology of wide-field, monostratified ganglion cells of the human retina. Vis Neurosci 1999;16:107-20.
46. Reese BE, Cowey A. Fibre organization of the monkey's optic tract. I. Segregation of functionally distinct optic axons. J Comp Neurol 1990;295:385-400.
47. Perry VH, Cowey A. Retinal ganglion cells that project to the superior colliculus and pretectum in the macaque monkey. Neuroscience 1984;12:1125-37.
48. Hattar S, Liao HW, Takao M, Berson DM, Yau KW. Melanopsincontaining retinal ganglion cells: architecture, projections, and intrinsic photosensitivity. Science 2002;295:1065-70.
49. Lucas RJ, Hattar S, Takao M, Berson DM, Foster RG, Yau KW. Diminished pupillary light reflex at high irradiances in melanopsinknockout mice. Science 2003;299:245-7.
50. Hattar S, Lucas RJ, Mrosovsky N, Thompson S, Douglas RH, Hankins MW, Lem J, Biel M, Hofmann F, Foster RG, Yau KW. Melanopsin and rod-cone photoreceptive systems account for all major accessory visual functions in mice. Nature 2003;424:76-81.
51. Berson DM. Strange vision: ganglion cells as circadian photoreceptors. Trends Neurosci 2003;26:314-20.
52. Dacey DM, Liao HW, Peterson BB, Robinson FR, Smith VC, Pokorny J, Yau KW, Gamlin PD. Melanopsin-expressing ganglion cells in primate retina signal colour and irradiance and project to the LGN. Nature 2005;433:749-54.
53. Barnard AR, Appleford JM, Sekaran S, Chinthapalli K, Jenkins A, Seeliger M, Biel M, Humphries P, Douglas RH, Wenzel A, Foster RG, Hankins MW, Lucas RJ. Residual photosensitivity in mice lacking both rod opsin and cone photoreceptor cyclic nucleotide gated channel 3 alpha subunit. Vis Neurosci 2004;21:675-83.
54. Wyatt HJ. A hypothesis concerning retinotopy in the optic nerve head and its relationship to perimetry. Clin Vision Sci 1992;7: 153-61.
55. Bresky RH, Charles S. Pupil motor perimetry. Am J Ophthalmol 1969;68:108-12.
56. Burke DW, Ogle KN. Comparison of visual and pupillary light thresholds in periphery. Arch Ophthalmol 1964;71:400-8.
57. Kardon RH, Kirkali PA, Thompson HS. Automated pupil perimetry. Pupil field mapping in patients and normal subjects. Ophthalmology 1991;98:485-95.
58. Hong S, Narkiewicz J, Kardon RH. Comparison of pupil perimetry and visual perimetry in normal eyes: decibel sensitivity and variability. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2001;42:957-65.
59. Wilhelm H, Neitzel J, Wilhelm B, Beuel S, Ludtke H, Kretschmann U, Zrenner E. Pupil perimetry using M-sequence stimulation technique. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2000;41:1229-38.
60. Yoshitomi T, Matsui T, Tanakadate A, Ishikawa S. Comparison of threshold visual perimetry and objective pupil perimetry in clinical patients. J Neuroophthalmol 1999;19:89-99.
61. Bowd C, Zangwill LM, Medeiros FA, Tavares IM, Hoffmann EM, Bourne RR, Sample PA, Weinreb RN. Structure-function relationships using confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy, optical coherence tomography, and scanning laser polarimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47:2889-95.
62. Gardiner SK, Johnson CA, Cioffi GA. Evaluation of the structurefunction relationship in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2005; 46:3712-17.
63. Artes PH, Chauhan BC. Longitudinal changes in the visual field and optic disc in glaucoma. Prog Retin Eye Res 2005;24:333-54.
64. Garway-Heath DF, Holder GE, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA. Relationship between electrophysiological, psychophysical, and anatomical measurements in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43: 2213-20.
65. Sample PA, Medeiros FA, Racette L, Pascual JP, Boden C, Zangwill LM, Bowd C, Weinreb RN. Identifying glaucomatous vision loss with visual-function- specific perimetry in the diagnostic innovations in glaucoma study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47:3381-9.
66. Li RS, Chen BY, Tay DK, Chan HH, Pu ML, So KF. Melanopsinexpressing retinal ganglion cells are more injury-resistant in a chronic ocular hypertension model. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2006;47: 2951-8.