About us |  Subscription |  Top cited articles |  e-Alerts  | Feedback |  Login   
  Home | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Search | Instructions   Print this article Email this article   Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
 
 Official publication of All India Ophthalmological Society   Users Online: 528
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed7215    
    Printed119    
    Emailed7    
    PDF Downloaded274    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 3    

Recommend this journal

 

 ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2003  |  Volume : 51  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 35-38

Humphrey visual field and frequency doubling perimetry in the diagnosis of early glaucoma.


VST Center for Glaucoma Care, L V Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India

Correspondence Address:
G Chandrasekhar
VST Center for Glaucoma Care, L V Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad
India
Login to access the Email id


PMID: 12701860

Get Permissions

Purpose: To compare Humphrey Visual Field Analyzer (HVF) and Frequency Doubling Perimetry (FDP) testing in the diagnosis of early glaucoma. Methods: We performed HVF (24-2 standard full threshold) and FDP (N-30) evaluations in 34 consecutive patients with early primary glaucoma and 96 normal subjects. Early glaucoma was defined on the basis of disc changes of glaucoma; the mean deviation on white-on-white perimetry had to be no worse than 6 decibels. Glaucomatous optic neuropathy was defined as a combination of cup-disc asymmetry of more than 0.2, notching, excavation, thinning or pallor of superior or inferior neuroretinal rims, retinal nerve fibre layer defects of the wedge or diffuse type and neuroretinal rim haemorrhage. Both the glaucoma patients and normal subjects had vision better than 6/9 with correction. They had no media opacities other than early nuclear sclerosis and no fundus pathology. Further, normal subjects were free of systemic diseases known to affect the retina or optic nerve, The sensitivity and specificity of HVF and FDP were calculated. Results: There were 44 eligible eyes among the 34 subjects. The glaucomatous disc findings included notch (n=8), pallor (n=21), thinning (n=23) and haemorrhage (n=1) of the neuroretinal rim. The sensitivity and the specificity of the HVF were 52.3% and 57.3% respectively. The sensitivity and the specificity of FDP were 65.9% and 61.5% respectively. Conclusion: The difference between FDP and HVF in the diagnosis of early glaucoma is not marked.






[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*


        
Print this article     Email this article

© 2005 - Indian Journal of Ophthalmology
Published by Medknow

Online since 1st April '05