June 2013
Volume 54, Issue 15
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2013
Pupil-based detection of asymmetric glaucomatous damage - comparison of the Konan RAPDx pupillograph, swinging flashlight method, and magnifier-assisted swinging flashlight method
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Mohsin Ali
    Glaucoma Service, Wills Eye Institute, Philadelphia, PA
    Jefferson Medical College, Philadelphia, PA
  • Lan Lu
    Glaucoma Service, Wills Eye Institute, Philadelphia, PA
  • Patricia Martinez
    Glaucoma Service, Wills Eye Institute, Philadelphia, PA
  • Bruno Faria
    Glaucoma Service, Wills Eye Institute, Philadelphia, PA
  • Lalita Gupta
    Glaucoma Service, Wills Eye Institute, Philadelphia, PA
  • Alice Zhang
    Glaucoma Service, Wills Eye Institute, Philadelphia, PA
    Jefferson Medical College, Philadelphia, PA
  • Eileen Hwang
    Glaucoma Service, Wills Eye Institute, Philadelphia, PA
  • Marlene Moster
    Glaucoma Service, Wills Eye Institute, Philadelphia, PA
  • George Spaeth
    Glaucoma Service, Wills Eye Institute, Philadelphia, PA
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships Mohsin Ali, None; Lan Lu, None; Patricia Martinez, None; Bruno Faria, None; Lalita Gupta, None; Alice Zhang, None; Eileen Hwang, None; Marlene Moster, Alcon (C), Alcon (F), Allergan (F), Allergan (C), Merck (F), Merck (C), Mobius (F), Aeon (F), Aerie (F), Ista (F), iScience (F), Solex (C), Baush and Lomb (F); George Spaeth, Merck (F), U.S. Patent No. 8,042,946 (P), Pfizer (F)
  • Footnotes
    Support None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2013, Vol.54, 4811. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Mohsin Ali, Lan Lu, Patricia Martinez, Bruno Faria, Lalita Gupta, Alice Zhang, Eileen Hwang, Marlene Moster, George Spaeth; Pupil-based detection of asymmetric glaucomatous damage - comparison of the Konan RAPDx pupillograph, swinging flashlight method, and magnifier-assisted swinging flashlight method. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2013;54(15):4811.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: Afferent pupillary defect (APD) testing is most commonly performed using the swinging flashlight method (SFM). The magnifier-assisted SFM (MA-SFM), which involves holding a +20-diopter lens in front of the eye being examined, has previously been found to increase the sensitivity of APD detection. Pupillography devices, such as the Konan RAPDx, may also allow for improved APD detection, while providing objective measurements of pupil response parameters. This study aims to compare the ability of the RAPDx pupillograph with the SFM and MA-SFM in the detection of asymmetric glaucomatous damage.

Methods: 118 patients presenting to the glaucoma service underwent full clinical examinations and APD testing with the SFM, MA-SFM, and RAPDx pupillograph. Each test was performed by separate examiners who were blinded to the patient’s clinical information and to the results of the other tests. Using the SFM and MA-SFM, an apparently positive APD was defined by the presence of immediate or delayed pupillary dilation. Using the RAPDx pupillograph, an apparently positive APD was defined by a calculated index of defect, Ampc, greater than 0.2 (representing the negative log of the difference between the amplitudes of constriction in one eye versus the other). An APD (positive SFM, positive MA-SFM, or Ampc > 0.2) was considered “corroborated” when there was a difference of (a) ≥ 1 Disc Damage Likelihood Scale unit between both eyes or (b) ≥ 0.1 cup/disc ratio between both eyes.

Results: 22/118 (18.6%) patients were unable to complete pupillography testing for reasons such as ptosis and irregular or fixed pupils. 39/118 patients were excluded because of retinal disease or insufficient clinical data. Apparent APDs were detected in 15/57 (26.3%), 35/57 (61.4%), and 35/57 (61.4%) by the SFM, MA-SFM, and RAPDx, respectively. “Corroborated” APDs were found in 9/57 (15.8%), 21/57 (36.8%), and 22/57 (38.6%) by the SFM, MA-SFM, and RAPDx, respectively. Clinically detected asymmetry in disc damage was missed in 28/57 (49.1%), 12/57 (21.1%), and 12/57 (21.1%) by the SFM, MA-SFM, and RAPDx, respectively.

Conclusions: The RAPDx pupillograph and MA-SFM are useful tools in the detection of asymmetric glaucomatous damage and are able to detect apparent and “corroborated” APDs more often than the SFM.

Keywords: 668 pupillary reflex • 667 pupil • 550 imaging/image analysis: clinical  
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×