December 2002
Volume 43, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   December 2002
Relationships Among Luminance, Acuity, Contrast, and Electrophysiological Perimetry in Patients with Retinitis Pigmentosa
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • WH Seiple
    Department of Ophthalmology New York University School of Medicine New York NY
  • C Clemens
    Department of Ophthalmology New York University School of Medicine New York NY
  • K Holopigian
    Department of Ophthalmology New York University School of Medicine New York NY
  • V Greenstein
    Department of Ophthalmology New York University School of Medicine New York NY
  • R Carr
    Department of Ophthalmology New York University School of Medicine New York NY
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   W.H. Seiple, None; C. Clemens, None; K. Holopigian, None; V. Greenstein, None; R. Carr, None. Grant Identification: Support: The Foundation Fighting Blindness, Dept. of Veterans Affairs, Rehabilitation Research and D
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science December 2002, Vol.43, 1168. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      WH Seiple, C Clemens, K Holopigian, V Greenstein, R Carr; Relationships Among Luminance, Acuity, Contrast, and Electrophysiological Perimetry in Patients with Retinitis Pigmentosa . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2002;43(13):1168.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Abstract: : Purpose: To compare a standard clinical measure of visual field sensitivity (Humphrey Visual Field Analyzer) to perimetry, measured using higher-level psychophysical tasks (acuity and contrast sensitivity), and to perimetry measured with the multifocal ERG (mfERG) technique in patients with retinitis pigmentosa (RP). Methods: Luminance sensitivity, letter acuity, and grating contrast sensitivity were measured at 13 locations within the central 10 degrees. Targets were presented along the horizontal and vertical meridians on a CRT display (mean luminance 150 cd/m2) for a duration of 375 msec. mfERGs were recorded using a standard protocol and a 103-hexagon array. Humphrey visual field thresholds were also measured at the same retinal locations. Data from a group of six patients with RP were compared to the results from six age-similar control subjects. For the patients, log losses in sensitivity from the average control values at the corresponding locations were calculated. Results: For this group of patients with RP, sensitivity on all of the tasks decreased as a function of eccentricity, as expected. Overall, luminance sensitivity and contrast sensitivity showed the least sensitivity loss (median = 0.18 and 0.17 log units, respectively). The mfERG amplitude measure was most affected (median = 0.52 log units) and spatial resolution showed an intermediate amount of loss (0.25 log units). Conclusion: These results suggest that perimetric measures of acuity and contrast sensitivity may prove to be useful additions to standard clinical field and mfERG measures for following disease progression.

Keywords: 624 visual fields • 562 retinal degenerations: hereditary • 393 electrophysiology: clinical 
×
×

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.

×