April 2010
Volume 51, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2010
Static and Dynamic Retinal Fixation Stability in Microperimetry
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • E. Convento
    Department of Ophthalmology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy
    The International Microperimetry Reading Centre, Padova, Italy
  • S. Vujosevic
    The International Microperimetry Reading Centre, Padova, Italy
    G.B. Bietti Eye Foundation, IRCCS, Roma, Italy
  • E. Pilotto
    Department of Ophthalmology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy
  • G. Bonin
    Department of Ophthalmology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy
  • I. Fregona
    Department of Ophthalmology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy
  • A. Ghirlando
    Department of Ophthalmology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy
  • E. Midena
    The International Microperimetry Reading Centre, Padova, Italy
    G.B. Bietti Eye Foundation, IRCCS, Roma, Italy
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2010, Vol.51, 1035. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      E. Convento, S. Vujosevic, E. Pilotto, G. Bonin, I. Fregona, A. Ghirlando, E. Midena; Static and Dynamic Retinal Fixation Stability in Microperimetry. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2010;51(13):1035.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : To evaluate retinal fixation stability, obtained by microperimetry, both in static and dynamic patterns, in normal and pathologic eyes.

Methods: : One hundred and thirty-one pathologic eyes (38 diabetic retinopathy, 35 age-related macular degeneration (AMD), 37 glaucoma and 21 vitreo-retinal interface disorders) and 152 aged-matched normal eyes were included in this study. Retinal fixation characteristic (stability) was studied during a pure fixation task (static fixation; 60 seconds) and during a differential light threshold quantification (dynamic fixation) by MP-1 microperimeter (Nidek, Gamagori, Japan). Fixation stability was quantified with both the automatic clinical score (central 2° and central 4°) and the automatic calculation of the bivariate contour ellipse area results (BCEA).

Results: : Using MP1 automatic clinical score of fixation stability in both static and dynamic condition, pathologic group was statistically different to normal group (p<0.0001). There was not significant difference between static and dynamic retinal fixation in normal group whereas in pathologic group the difference between static and dynamic retinal fixation was statistically significant (p<0.0001). Analyzing BCEA the difference between pathologic and control groups was statistically significant both in static and in dynamic retinal fixation (p<0.001). The difference between static and dynamic fixation is statistically significant both in normal and in pathologic eyes (p<0.0001). Fixation stability is related with both techniques, to the etiology of macular disorders (static, p<0.0001; dynamic, p<0.001).

Conclusions: : Fixation stability may be characterized, using microperimetry, by static and dynamic patterns. BCEA can be useful for monitoring minimal quantitative changes of the fixation area, related to the standard clinical score. Fixation stability remains the most important clinical parameter of retinal fixation in macular disorders.

Keywords: perimetry • age-related macular degeneration • diabetic retinopathy 
×
×

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.

×