Cataract and high‐pass resolution perimetry

Martin, Lene

doi:10.1111/j.1600-0420.1997.tb00118.x

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(12 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, further investigations are needed to confirm this. The opacities inside the optic axis, such as lens opacity, cataract, corneal opacity, and pterygium may cause visual field changes ( 27 - 30 ). It was reported that, in 22 patients with pterygium, visual fields were affected by the size of the lesion, and in another patient, after pterygium excision, visual field defect disappeared ( 30 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual Field Indices Changes after Pterygium Surgery

Uçar¹

2021

Beyoglu Eye J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: This study was a prospective evaluation of changes in the results of visual field tests taken before and after pterygium excision. Methods: This was a prospective, single-center study. Seventy-five eyes of 75 patients who had undergone pterygium excision with autograft implantation were enrolled. All of the patients had stage III pterygium according to the Johnston classification. The mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD), and visual field index (VFI) global index changes after pterygium excision were compared to evaluate the effect of pterygium on visual field analysis. Results: The mean preoperative MD value was -3.04±2.63 dB (range: -14.84–0.62 dB) and the mean postoperative MD value was -1.83±2.09 dB (range: -13.82–1.74 dB) (p<0.001). The mean preoperative PSD value was 2.59±1.92 dB (range: 1.16–12.76 dB) and the mean postoperative PSD value was 2.41±1.62 dB (1.15–13.29 dB) (p>0.05). The mean preoperative VFI value was 96.01±4.46% (range: 68–100%) and the mean postoperative VFI value was 96.28±4.18% (range: 70–100%) (p>0.05). Conclusion: After pterygium excision, the MD improved significantly. However, the PSD and VFI did not change significantly. The significant change in MD value was related to the reduction in corneal light scattering, contrast sensitivity, aberrations, and blockage on the optic axis.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual Field Indices Changes after Pterygium Surgery

Uçar¹

2021

Beyoglu Eye J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2001) and frequency‐doubling technology (FDT) (Siddiqui et al. 2005), as well as from high‐pass resolution perimetry (Martin 1997), are influenced by lens opacities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Follow-up examinations using perimetry and foveal function tests are important in the management of patients with glaucoma and AMD. However, the interpretation of results from these examinations can be problematic in the presence of cataract: perimetry results from conventional (Hayashi et al 2001) and frequencydoubling technology (FDT) (Siddiqui et al 2005), as well as from high-pass resolution perimetry (Martin 1997), are influenced by lens opacities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rarebit perimetry and fovea test before and after cataract surgery

Nilsson

Abdiu

Laurell

et al. 2010

Acta Ophthalmologica

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. Purpose: To evaluate the effect of cataract on rarebit perimetry and the fovea test. Methods: Twenty‐five consecutive patients scheduled for cataract surgery (mean age 63.0 ± 7.9 years) were examined prior to and after cataract surgery with a complete ophthalmological examination. In addition, the rarebit perimetry (RBP) and the rarebit fovea test (RFT) were performed. Results: Best‐corrected visual acuity [BCVA, expressed in minimum angle of resolution (MAR)], RBP and RFT mean hit rate (MHR) improved significantly after cataract surgery. The relative pre–postsurgery difference was larger in the RFT [2.1 standard deviations (SDs)] compared to in BCVA (0.78 SDs). Seven patients had good BCVA (≤ 1.25) and RBP (83–99%) but low RFT (0–66%) before surgery. One patient with low preoperative BCVA (2.5) had a normal RFT (94%). Conclusion: Cataract influenced both the RFT and RBP test, albeit the former more than the latter. The influence of cataract on RFT results, even when visual acuity is decreased only moderately, has to be taken into account when evaluating foveal function in patients with cataract. The larger relative change in RFT compared to BCVA values is thought to indicate that RFT is more sensitive for the effect of cataract. Therefore, RFT appears to be a sensitive test for visual disturbance and can presumably provide additional information at the preoperative evaluation of the patient.

show abstract

Comparison of Conventional and High-Pass Resolution Perimetry in a Prospective Study of Patients With Glaucoma and Healthy Controls

Chauhan

House²,

McCormick³

et al. 1999

Arch Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To determine whether high-pass resolution perimetry detected glaucomatous visual field progression earlier than conventional perimetry. Methods: In a prospective longitudinal study, we observed 113 patients with open-angle glaucoma and with early to moderate visual field damage and 119 healthy control subjects. Each subject underwent testing at 6-month intervals using conventional and high-pass resolution perimetry (program 30-2 of the Humphrey Field Analyzer [Humphrey Instruments, Inc, San Leandro, Calif] and the Ring program of the Ophthimus perimeter [Hi-Tech Vision, Gö teborg, Sweden], respectively). Our predetermined criterion for progression with conventional perimetry was the presence of at least 4 overlapping nonedge locations outside the fifth percentile for test-retest variability of threshold deviations (defined by the Glaucoma Change Probability Analysis of the Statpac 2 program) in 2 of 3 consecutive visual fields. We employed the identical criterion for progression with highpass resolution perimetry using our own test-retest variability data. We repeated this procedure in the controls to measure the false-positive rate of progression. Results: Patients were observed for a median of 4.5 years and 11 examinations with each technique. Fiftyseven patients (50.4%) did not show progression with either technique. Twenty-four patients (21.2%) showed progression with high-pass resolution perimetry alone, whereas 6 (5.3%) showed progression with conventional perimetry alone. Of the remaining 26 patients (23.0%) who showed progression with both techniques, 14 (54%) showed progression with high-pass resolution perimetry first (median, 12 months earlier); 5 (19%), with conventional perimetry first (median, 6 months earlier); and 7 (27%), with both techniques at the same time. Controls were observed for a median of 5 years and 11 examinations with each technique. One control (0.8%) showed progression with high-pass resolution perimetry. Conclusions: Our results suggest that high-pass resolution perimetry detects glaucomatous visual field progression earlier than conventional perimetry in most patients with progression.

show abstract

Cataract and high‐pass resolution perimetry

Cited by 11 publications

References 8 publications

Visual Field Indices Changes after Pterygium Surgery

Visual Field Indices Changes after Pterygium Surgery

Rarebit perimetry and fovea test before and after cataract surgery

Comparison of Conventional and High-Pass Resolution Perimetry in a Prospective Study of Patients With Glaucoma and Healthy Controls

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About