Oculus-spark perimetry compared with 3 procedures of glaucoma morphologic analysis (GDx, HRT, and OCT)

European Journal of Ophthalmology

Volumn 23, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 316-323

  de la Rosa, Manuel Gonzalez ^a   Gonzalez Hernandez, Marta ^b   Sanchez Garcia, Mariel ^b   de la Vega, Rodriguez Ricardo ^b   Diaz Aleman, Tinguaro ^b   Rios, Alicia Pareja ^b  

^a UNIVERSIDAD DE LA LAGUNA   (Spain)

^b HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARIO DE CANARIAS   (Spain)

Author keywords

Glaucoma; Morphology; Optic nerve; Perimetry

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CASE CONTROL STUDY; CIRRUS OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; GLAUCOMA; HEIDELBERG RETINAL TOMOGRAPH; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MORPHOLOGY; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; OPTICAL COHERENCE TOMOGRAPHY; PERIMETER; PERIMETRY; POLARIMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RETINA NERVE CELL; RETINAL THICKNESS; SCOTOMA; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPARK PERIMETRY; TOMOGRAPHY; ZEISS LASER POLARIMETRY;

CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES, OPHTHALMOLOGICAL; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; NERVE FIBERS; OPTIC DISK; OPTIC NERVE DISEASES; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RETINAL GANGLION CELLS; ROC CURVE; SCANNING LASER POLARIMETRY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY; TOMOGRAPHY, OPTICAL COHERENCE; VISUAL FIELD TESTS;

EID: 84876554326     PISSN: 11206721     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5301/ejo.5000233     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Gonzalez de la Rosa M, Gonzalez-Hernandez M. A strategy for averaged estimates of visual field threshold: Spark. J Glaucoma 2013; 22: 284-289.
2. Gonzalez de la Rosa M, Reyes JA, Gonzalez Sierra MA. Rapid assessment of the visual field in glaucoma using an analysis based on multiple correlations. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1990; 228: 387-91.
3. Gonzalez de la Rosa M, Hernandez Brito A, Quijada E. Cam-pimetría para glaucoma explorando cuatro puntos. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol 1992; 62: 93-98.
4. Gloor B, Schmied U, Faessler A. Changes of glaucomatous field defects. Degree of accuracy of measurements with the automatic perimeter Octopus. Int Ophthalmol 1980; 3: 5-10.
5. Werner EB, Krupin T, Adelson A, Feitl ME. Effect of patient experience on the results of automated perimetry in glaucoma suspect patients. Ophthalmology 1990; 97: 44-48.
6. Pierre-Filho PdeT, Schimiti RB, de Vasconcellos J P, Costa V P. Sensitivity and specificity of frequency-doubling technology, tendency-oriented perimetry, SITA Standard and SITA Fast perimetry in perimetrically inexperienced individuals. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 2006; 84: 345-350.
7. Garway-Heath D F, Poinoosawmy D, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA. Mapping the visual field to the optic disc in normal tension glaucoma eyes. Ophthalmology 2000; 107: 1809-1815.
8. González De La Rosa M, González Hernández M, Agui-lar Estévez J, Abreu Reyes A, Pareja Ríos A. Clasificación topográfica del campo visual glaucomatoso. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol 2002; 77: 87-94.
9. Heijl A, Drance SM. Changes in differential threshold in patients with glaucoma during prolonged perimetry. Br J Oph-thalmol 1983; 67: 512-516.
10. Gonzalez de la Rosa M, Pareja A. Influence of the "fatigue effect" on the mean deviation measurement in perimetry. Eur J Ophthalmol 1997; 7: 29-34.
11. Gonzalez de la Rosa M, Martinez A, Sanchez M, Mesa C, Cordoves L, Losada M. Accuracy of the tendency oriented perimetry (TOP) in the Octopus 1-2-3 Perimeter. In: Wall M, Wild J, eds. Perimetry Update 1996/1997. Amsterdam: Ku-gler; 1997: 119-123.
12. Bengtsson B, Olsson J, Heijl A, Rootzén H. A new generation of algorithms for computerized threshold perimetry, SITA. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 1997; 75: 368-375.
13. Maeda H, Nakaura M, Negi A. New perimetric threshold test algorithm with dynamic strategy and tendency oriented perimetry (TOP) in glaucomatous eyes. Eye 2000; 14: 747-751.
14. Nordmann JP, Brion F, Hamard P, Mouton-Chopin D. Evaluation of the Humphrey perimetry programs SITA Standard and SITA Fast in normal probands and patients with glaucoma. J Fr Ophtalmol 1998; 21: 549-54.
15. González de la Rosa M, González-Hernández M, Abraldes M, Azuara-Blanco A. Quantification of interpoint topographic correlations of threshold values in glaucomatous visual fields. J Glaucoma 2002; 11: 30-34.
16. Krakau CE. Visual field testing with reduced sets of test points. A computerized analysis. Doc Ophthalmol 1989; 73: 71-80.
17. Weber J, Diestelhorst M. Perimetric follow-up in glaucoma with a reduced set of test points. Ger J Ophthalmol 1992;1: 409-414.
18. Gonzalez de la Rosa M, Gonzalez-Hernandez M, Garcia Feijoo J, Morales J, Azuara-Blanco A. Diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility of tendency oriented perimetry in glaucoma. Eur J Ophthalmol 2006; 16: 259-267.
19. Gonzalez-Hernandez M, Morales J, Azuara-Blanco A, Garcia Sanchez J, Gonzalez de la Rosa M. Comparison of diagnostic ability between a fast strategy, tendency oriented perimetry (TOP), and the standard bracketing strategy. Oph-thalmologica 2005; 219: 373-378.
20. Gonzalez-Hernandez M, de la Rosa MG, de la Vega RR, Hernandez-Vidal A. Long-term fluctuation of standard automatic perimetry, pulsar perimetry and frequency-doubling technology in early glaucoma diagnosis. Ophthalmic Res 2007; 39: 338-343.
21. Gonzalez de la Rosa M, Mendez Hernandez C, Perez Hernandez JR, et al. TOP strategy and Pulsar T30W perimetry in glaucoma early diagnosis. In: Reece SM, ed. Focus on Glaucoma Research. New York: Nova Science Publishers Inc; 2005: 117-172.
22. González-de la Rosa M, González-Hernández M, Aguilar-Estévez J, Díaz-Alemán T, Armas-Plasencia R. Capacidad diagnóstica del HRT-II y de las perimetrías TOP, PULSAR y FDT en pacientes sospechosos de sufrir glaucoma. Arch Soc Esp Oftalmol 2007; 82: 413-422.
23. Zeppieri M, Brusini P, Parisi L, Johnson CA, Sampaolesi R, Salvetat ML. Pulsar perimetry in the diagnosis of early glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 2010; 149: 102-112.
24. Oddone F, Centofanti M, Tanga L, et al. Influence of disc size on optic nerve head versus retinal nerve fiber layer assessment for diagnosing glaucoma. Ophthalmology 2011; 118: 1340-1347.
25. Garway-Heath D F, Caprioli J, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA. Scaling the hill of vision: the physiological relationship between light sensitivity and ganglion cell numbers. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2000; 41: 1774-1782.
26. Gonzalez-Hernandez M, Pablo LE, Armas-Dominguez K, de la Vega RR, Ferreras A, de la Rosa MG. Structure-function relationship depends on glaucoma severity. Br J Ophthalmol 2009; 93: 1195-1199.
27. Leite MT, Zangwill LM, Weinreb RN, Rao HL, Alencar LM, Medeiros FA. Structure-function relationships using the Cirrus spectral domain optical coherence tomograph and standard automated perimetry. J Glaucoma 2012; 21: 49-54.
28. Aptel F, Sayous R, Fortoul V, Beccat S, Denis P. Structure-function relationships using spectral-domain optical coherence tomography: comparison with scanning laser polarimetry. Am J Ophthalmol 2010; 150: 825-833.