Purchase this article with an account.
Erika Rigoni, Carmela Carnevale, Daniela Domanico, Enzo M Vingolo; Comparison among humphrey field analyzer and nidek MP-1 in retinitis pigmentosa patients. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2014;55(13):1407.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
To evaluate retinal sensitivity in patients with retinitis pigmentosa (RP) using the MP-1 microperimeter (Nidek Technologies, Italy) and Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA).
Ten patients (10 eyes) with retinitis pigmentosa (mean age 48,2 8,9 years) were assessed. Subjects performed one examination using the HFA (10-2 pattern) and one using the MP-1 microperimeter. All tested eyes had defects encroaching within 10° of fixation. Fixation score, central 2 and 4 degrees values and bivariate contour ellipse area (BCEA) were obtained from the MP-1. Statistical analysis was performed with Student’s t-test. Values < 0.05 were considered significant.
BCVA was 0.64 ± 0.46 logMAR; in all patients refractive errors not exceeding -1.50D sphere and −1.50D cylinder. BCEA which contained 99% fixation points was 5.58 ± 5.46 degree sq. Fixation within the 2° and 4° diameter circle were 68.9± 24,25 % and 90,7 ± 8,59 % respectively. Sensitivity values for the MP-1 (mean 4.94 ± 6.55 dB) were not significantly different from HFA values (mean 5.81 ± 6.31 dB) (p =0,056).
Although there was not significant difference in retinal sensitivity between MP-1 and HFA, these two devices presented a different background luminance level and also a significant advantage of the MP-1 micro perimeter over the HFA is the capability for fixation stability quantification.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only