These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed


  • Title: Humphrey matrix frequency doubling perimetry for detection of visual-field defects in open-angle glaucoma.
    Author: Clement CI, Goldberg I, Healey PR, Graham S.
    Journal: Br J Ophthalmol; 2009 May; 93(5):582-8. PubMed ID: 18669543.
    Abstract:
    AIM: Matrix perimetry uses frequency-doubling technology (FDT) incorporated into a 5 degrees test target. This permits testing of the same number of locations within a defined visual field as standard automated perimetry (SAP) and may improve performance compared with original FDT perimetry. This study investigates the performance of Humphrey Matrix perimetry for detecting glaucomatous visual-field loss. DESIGN: Prospective case control study. METHODS: We recruited 115 participants with glaucomatous visual-field loss and 33 normal controls from an urban glaucoma practice. Each participant performed SITA 24-2 SAP then threshold 24-2 Matrix perimetry. Severity of visual-field loss was defined using SAP mean deviation (MD) as early (MD >-6 dB), moderate (MD -6 to -12 dB) or advanced (MD <-12 dB). The sensitivity and specificity of Humphrey Matrix perimetry were calculated for different automated indices. RESULTS: The matrix perimetry sensitivity and specificity were up to 100% for moderate and advanced glaucomatous visual-field loss. A receiver operator characteristic area under the curve (AUC) analysis revealed MD to be slightly better than pattern standard deviation (PSD) for defining moderate (AUC: MD 0.997; PSD 0.987) and advanced defects (AUC: MD 1.000; PSD 0.987). Matrix was less sensitive (up to 87.3%) for detecting early glaucomatous visual-field loss compared with SITA 24-2 SAP (AUC: PSD 0.948; MD 0.910). CONCLUSIONS: Matrix perimetry is excellent for detection of moderate to advanced glaucomatous visual-field loss but may miss some early defects. It may be well suited to following progression of early to moderate field loss because of a smaller target size compared with original FDT perimetry.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]