scholarly journals Non-standard computer perimetry in the diagnosis of some optic neuropathies

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-87
Author(s):  
Irina A. Tikhonovskaya ◽  
Irina L. Simakova

Modern computer perimetry is divided into traditional white stimulus-on-white background, the gold standard of which is perimetry performed by using expert class perimeters Humphrey and Octopus and therefore called standard automatic or automated perimetry (SAP), and non-traditional or non-standard perimetry, which differs, first of all, in a different nature of a stimulus. The article is a review devoted to the assessment of the diagnostic capabilities of non-standard computer perimetry in the form of different variants of perimetry with doubling the spatial frequency (Frequency Doubling Technology Perimetry or FDT perimetry), which is performed by using perimeters of the 1st (Carl Zeiss Humphrey 710 Visual Field / FDT, 1997) and the 2nd (Carl Zeiss Humphrey Matrix / HM 715, 800 Visual Field Analyzer, 2005, 2010) generation. Most authors consider that FDT perimetry is effective in a glaucoma screening and, possibly, in monitoring a glaucomatous process, but only a few authors consider that non-standard perimetry method can be useful in diagnosing optic neuropathies of a different nature.

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Costantino Schiavi ◽  
Filippo Tassi ◽  
Alessandro Finzi ◽  
Mauro Cellini

Purpose. To investigate the effects of Bangerter filters on the visual field in healthy and in amblyopic patients.Materials and Methods. Fifteen normal adults and fifteen anisometropic amblyopia patients were analysed with standard automated perimetry (SAP) and frequency doubling technology (FDT) at baseline and with filters 0.8 and 0.1.Results. With 0.1 filter in SAP there was an increase of MD compared with controls (−10.24 ± 1.09 dB) in either the amblyopic (−11.34 ± 2.06 dB;P<0.050) or sound eyes (−11.34 ± 1.66 dB;P<0.030). With filters 0.8 the PSD was increased in the amblyopic eyes (2.09 ± 0.70 dB;P<0.007) and in the sound eyes (1.92 ± 0.29 dB;P<0.004) compared with controls. The FDT-PSD values in the control group were increased with the interposition of the filters compared to baseline (0.8;P<0.0004and 0.1;P<0.0010). We did not find significant differences of the baseline PSD between amblyopic eyes (3.80 ± 2.21 dB) and the sound eyes (4.33 ± 1.31 dB) and when comparing the filters 0.8 (4.55 ± 1.50 versus 4.53 ± 1.76 dB) and 0.1 (4.66 ± 1.80 versus 5.10 ± 2.04 dB).Conclusions. The use of Bangerter filters leads to a reduction of the functionality of the magno- and parvocellular pathway.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document