March 2012
Volume 53, Issue 14
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   March 2012
Heidelberg Edge Perimetry: evaluation of the Flicker Defined Form test, versus Matrix, in normal and glaucoma subjects
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Frank May
    Hôpital du Val de Grace, Paris, France
  • Jean-Marie Giraud
    Hôpital du Val de Grace, Paris, France
  • Marlène Francoz
    Hôpital du Val de Grace, Paris, France
  • Hussam El Chehab
    Hôpital du Val de Grace, Paris, France
  • Jean-Rémi Fénolland
    Hôpital du Val de Grace, Paris, France
  • Damien Sendon
    Hôpital du Val de Grace, Paris, France
  • Charlotte Denier
    Hôpital du Val de Grace, Paris, France
  • Fouad El Asri
    Hôpital du Val de Grace, Paris, France
  • Mamour Dieng
    Hôpital du Val de Grace, Paris, France
  • Jean-Paul Renard
    Hôpital du Val de Grace, Paris, France
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  Frank May, None; Jean-Marie Giraud, None; Marlène Francoz, None; Hussam El Chehab, None; Jean-Rémi Fénolland, None; Damien Sendon, None; Charlotte Denier, None; Fouad El Asri, None; Mamour Dieng, None; Jean-Paul Renard, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science March 2012, Vol.53, 186. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Frank May, Jean-Marie Giraud, Marlène Francoz, Hussam El Chehab, Jean-Rémi Fénolland, Damien Sendon, Charlotte Denier, Fouad El Asri, Mamour Dieng, Jean-Paul Renard; Heidelberg Edge Perimetry: evaluation of the Flicker Defined Form test, versus Matrix, in normal and glaucoma subjects. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2012;53(14):186.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : To evaluate a new non-conventional perimetric test, the Flicker-Defined Form perimetry (FDF), provided by the Heidelberg Edge Perimeter, and to analyse its capacity to detect visual field defect, comparatively to Matrix using doubling-frequency technology (FDT), in normal subjects and in patients treated for primary angle glaucoma (POAG).

Methods: : Comparative trial including 65 eyes of 35 subjects who performed: full clinical examination, measurement of the retinal nerve fiber layer thickness (RNFL) by scanning laser polarimetry GDx PRO, standard automated perimetry (SAP) using Humphrey SITA 24.2 test, FDT-Matrix 24.2 test and FDF test. Perimetric tests (SAP, FDT-Matrix and FDF) were performed two times, and only the second test was used in the study. Were excluded: visual acuity (VA) < 8/10, refraction error > 3 dioptries, and associated ocular disease. Subjects were divided in 2 groups: a control group composed of 35 eyes of 19 normal subjects, mean age of 40,5 years, without any abnormality in GDx or SAP, and a POAG group consisted of 30 eyes of 16 patients, mean age 69,1 years, treated for POAG, presenting glaucomatous alterations of RNFL in GDx and visual defect in SAP: 23 early, 4 moderate and 3 advanced POAG.

Results: : Control group: 37% (13/35 eyes) present visual field defect in FDF, and 6% (2/35) in FDT-Matrix. Defects detected by FDF are significantly more frequent than those detected by FDT-Matrix (Pearson Chi-2 test: p < 0,01). Among the 13 cases of FDF defects, the visual field loss was extended more than 1 quadrant in 8 eyes.POAG group: 87% (26/30 eyes) present defect in FDF, and 90% (27/30) in FDT-Matrix. No significant difference was found between the 2 tests (Pearson Chi-2 test: p > 0,9). All moderate and advanced POAG eyes present defects in both tests. Eyes with normal FDF or FDT-Matrix presented mild SAP defects.In POAG group, FDF test and FDT-Matrix show high sensibilities: 87% and 90%. Inversely, FDF specificity is found very low, 63%, comparatively to FDT-Matrix, 94%, probably because of a learning effect with FDF perimetry. These results must be confirmed by further studies.

Conclusions: : The new non-conventional perimetric test, the FDF perimetry, seems to be useful to detect visual field defect in POAG, but with a low specificity.

Keywords: perimetry • visual fields • optic nerve 
×
×

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.

×