Purchase this article with an account.
Elham Hatef Naimi, Afsheen Khwaja, Mohamed Ibrahim, Yasir Sepah, Roomasa Channa, Zubir Rentiya, Jangwon Heo, Diana Do, David Guyton, Quan Nguyen; The Relationship Between Macular Sensitivity Measured By An Automatic Fundus Perimetry/Tomography System And Visual Acuity Measured By 1) An ETDRS Chart And 2) A Potential Acuity Meter. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2011;52(14):4462.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
To evaluate relationship between macular sensitivity measured by an automatic fundus perimetry/tomography system and visual acuity (VA) measured by both an ETDRS chart and a Potential Acuity Meter (PAM) in patients with macular edema (ME).
Patients with macular edema secondary to diabetic retinopathy or non-infectious, intermediate, posterior- or pan-uveitis were enrolled. Best refractive correction for all patients was determined using the ETDRS protocol, and best corrected visual acuity (BCVA) was assessed using an ETDRS chart as well as by a PAM. Macular sensitivity was measured by an automatic fundus perimetry/ tomography system [Scanning laser ophthalmoscope/ Spectral domain optical coherence tomography (SLO/OCTTM), OPKO/OTI]. Relationships between best-corrected ETDRS and PAM visual acuities and macular sensitivity were evaluated using mixed effect modeling with random intercepts while adjusting for age, gender, underlying disease, macular thickness, fixation stability, and fixation location.
Twenty-two eyes of 18 patients were included in the study. Age ranged from 23-87 years (median: 55 yrs). Ten patients (56%) had diabetic ME and 8 (44%) had uveitic ME. BCVA using ETDRS chart ranged from 20/25 to 20/125 (median: 20/40). BCVA measured by PAM ranged from 20/20 to 20/100 (median: 20/40). Macular thickness had a range of 87 to 702 microns (median: 324) while macular sensitivity ranged from 0 to 18 decibel (dB) (median: 10). Visual acuity differences were calculated using LogMAR values. Mean LogMAR value using the ETDRS chart was 0.38 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.29, 0.46), while it was 0.30 (95% CI: 0.21, 0.40) using the PAM (P-value: 0.038). Macular sensitivity was negatively correlated with LogMAR values using ETDRS chart as well as PAM (r= -0.18 and -0.25 respectively). Macular sensitivity decreased by an average of 1.92dB (95% confidence interval (CI): -11.38, 7.54) per unit increase in LogMAR value for BCVA measured with ETDRS chart. Macular sensitivity decreased by an average of 5.87dB (95% CI: - 14.00, 2.26) per unit increase in LogMAR value for BCVA measured with the PAM.
Macular sensitivity varied with BCVA measured with two methods. Macular sensitivity was better correlated with PAM than with ETDRS chart. A larger sample size would provide stronger evidence regarding the relationship between macular sensitivity and BCVA measured with these different methods.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only