Die Perimetrie des blinden Flecks

Abstract

The reproducibility of perimetrie results on the blind spot has been investigated under controlled conditions using the kinetic perimetry of Goldmann and the computerized static perimeter of Krakau-Heijl. At defined time intervals kinetic perimetry was performed twice by two independent well-trained perimetrists on 178 eyes of 107 patients; the same eyes and patients were examined twice with the computer perimeter as well. Perimetrie results obtained from 158 eyes were considered for statistics. There was qualitative agreement based on the alternative ‘normal’ or ‘pathological’ in kinetic perimetry in 74% of the double examinations and in 89% in computer perimetry. Identical size of the blind spot in repeated examinations was found in 34% with the Goldmann perimeter and in 78% with the computer perimeter. Observer variability of the static computer perimetry of the blind spot was compared with the variability of the results on the rest of the central visual field.

Scotoma mapping by semi‐automated kinetic perimetry: the effects of stimulus properties and the speed of subjects' responses

“…The majority of prior studies have used the blind spot as a well defined model of a small scotoma (Aulhorn et al 1987). Studies have been performed to determine rates of detection of the physiological blind spot by automated static perimetry using different strategies (Gramer et al 1979; Funkhouser et al 1988; Safran et al 1993); the influence of stray light and optic disc topography on the detection and size of the blind spot have been studied (Fankhauser & Haeberlin 1980; Meyer et al 1997); and the effect of varying stimulus qualities on the differential luminance thresholds at the border of the blind spot have been carefully documented (Bek & Lund‐Andersen 1989; Glück et al 1999).…”

“…We also evaluated the reproducibility of the method to estimate its probable reliability under clinical conditions. To our knowledge, the physiological blind spot has not been investigated by SKP, although there are numerous reports for which automated static perimetry (Gramer et al 1979; Safran et al 1993) and manual kinetic perimetry (Armaly 1969) have been used. This has allowed us to compare our results with previously published data.…”

Detecting Diabetic Retinal Neuropathy Using Fundus Perimetry

“…The land area of the island represents the sensitivity of the field of view, a higher island represents higher retinal sensitivity, and a lower land area at the edge of the island indicates lower retinal sensitivity. At a distance of approximately 15 • temporal from the center, there is an area with zero retinal sensitivity called the blind spot that is approximately 5 • in diameter [2]. This blind spot corresponds to the area where the optic nerve exits the eye, and since there are no light sensitive photoreceptor cells in this area (optic nerve papilla), it is an absolute dark spot.…”

“…One of these is kinetic visual field testing, which measures the extent of the visual field by moving the stimulus. Goldmann perimetry is used as kinetic perimetry; the larger and brighter the stimulus, which can be seen even in the periphery of the visual field, the larger the visual field [2]. In contrast, the smaller the stimulus, the smaller the visual field.…”

What Is the Most Suitable Grid for Computer Perimetry in Glaucoma Patients?

“…In numerous investigations [2,9,10,[14][15][16][17], computerized static perimetry has proved to be more sensitive than kinetic perimetry in visual fields of glaucoma pa- 1 Presented in part at the 147th Meeting of the Asso ciation of Rhine-Westphalian Ophthalmologists, Co logne 1985.…”