June 2017
Volume 58, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2017
Sensitivity and Specificity of a new perimeter for glaucoma diagnostics
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Maria Tafel
    Department of Ophthalmology, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany
  • Oliver Stachs
    Department of Ophthalmology, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany
  • Bernhard Lobmayr
    Ellex, Berlin, Germany
  • Anselm G M Juenemann
    Department of Ophthalmology, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Maria Tafel, None; Oliver Stachs, None; Bernhard Lobmayr, Ellex (E); Anselm Juenemann, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  none
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2017, Vol.58, 2872. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to Subscribers Only
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Maria Tafel, Oliver Stachs, Bernhard Lobmayr, Anselm G M Juenemann; Sensitivity and Specificity of a new perimeter for glaucoma diagnostics. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2017;58(8):2872.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Compass is a new device that combines automated perimetry with confocal images of the retina and optical nerve head. Furthermore, the incorporated eye tracking system facilitates identical follow up investigations. The aim of the study was to compare the results of Compass perimetry (Ellex, Germany) with those of Humphrey perimetry (Carl Zeiss Meditec, Germany).

Methods : A total of 47 subjects (26 control subjects, 21 patients with open angle glaucoma) underwent full perimetric evaluation using the FAP Zest (Compass) and HFA Sita Fast (Humphrey Field Analyzer 3). Only one eye was included into the analysis. Technical specifications of the Compass device are: background luminance: 31,4 asb, maximum luminance: 10000 asb, stimulus size: Goldmann III, stimulus duration: 200 ms and 24-2 grid (54 locations spaced by 6 degrees). HFA parameter are: background luminance: 31,5 asb, maximum luminance: 10000 asb, stimulus size: Goldmann IV, stimulus duration: 200 ms and 24-2 grid (54 locations spaced by 6 degrees). Perimetry specificity and sensitivity were determined using MD, PSD and MD+PSD whereas MD >- 2 and PSD < 6 are used as cutting off values. Spearman correlation coefficient was calculated for MD and PSD.

Results : Six subjects (1 control, 6 glaucoma) were excluded due to low reliability (fixation loss, false positives). The specificity of Compass and HFA was 100% in the control group for MD, PSD and MD+PSD. The sensitivity of Compass in glaucoma patients was 73,33% for MD, 66,67% for PSD and 66,67% for MD+PSD. The sensitivity of Humphrey in glaucoma patients was 93,33% for MD, 66,67% for PSD and 66,67% for MD+PSD. Compass and HFA showed significant correlation for MD (r=0.87, p=0.00002) and PSD (r=0.89, p<0.00001).

Conclusions : Based on the current study, Compass provides similar perimetric results compared to the Humphrey device. The difference in MD sensitivity between Compass and HFA might be due to the different stimulus size. As a forefront advantage Compass combines the retinal threshold sensitivity directly with confocal images of the retina.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2017 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Baltimore, MD, May 7-11, 2017.

×
×

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.

×