Purchase this article with an account.
M.T. Andrada, E. Ayala, A. Anton; Correlation between Sita Standard Perimetry and Frequency Doubling Perimetry in Glaucoma . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2003;44(13):53.
Download citation file:
© ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)
Purpose. To evaluate the quantitative and topographical correlation between SITA standard perimetry and frequency doubling perimetry (FDT). Methods. Cross-sectional study. Sixty seven eyes with primary open angle glaucoma were examined. Optic nerve was assessed with stereo disk photographs, and all patients performed standard perimetry (Humphrey Field Analyzer II, program 24-2, SITA algorithm) and frequency doubling perimetry (Humphrey, program N-30). All visual fields were reliable and results were confirmed with at least a second examination. To compare FDT and 24-2 fields, different locations of 24-2 were grouped according to FDT zone distribution and the mean of threshold values and probability values for each zone was calculated. Quantitative and topographical correlation between the two functional tests was assessed with Pearson`s Correlation Coeficient and Student's t Test, globally and at 3 different degrees of damage. Results. There is statistically significant correlation between the global indices, mean defect (r2 : 0,63; p<0,001) and pattern standard deviation ( r2: 0,42; p<0,001), of SITA and FDT. Point by point threshold sensitivity values of both tests significantly correlate in 89% of visual field locations (Pearson's Correlation Coefficient, p> 0,005). There were significant differences (Students t Test, p< 0,05) between mean threshold values in 6 locations (31,5%) of 19 examined. In 42% of visual field location both test, were normal, defect was deeper with FDT in 17 % of visual field locations and defect was deeper with SITA in 27% of locations. Conclusion: There is a significant quantitative and topographical correlation between SITA and FDT in glaucoma patients. Certain differences in defect depth and distribution do exist and may be due to the characteristics of this two different functional tests.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only