Charles F. Bosworth

Spatial relationship of motion automated perimetry and optic disc topography in patients with glaucomatous optic neuropathy.

PURPOSE To compare the spatial relationship of focal motion automated perimetry (MAP) visual field defect with focal defect in optic disc topography. METHODS Patients (n = 12) with focal MAP visual field loss and focal change in optic disc topography were studied. The MAP visual field was divided into 12 field zones representing retinal nerve fiber layer arcuate bundles. Zones of MAP loss were related to rim area ratio (RAR), which was obtained by dividing the rim area, measured by the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph (HRT; Heidelberg Engineering, Heidelberg, Germany), into 36 10 degrees sectors and then dividing the area of each sector by the total rim area for each subject. Rim area ratio was compared to a normative database (n = 76) to quantify change in optic disc topography. In these same patients, the spatial relationship between standard automated perimetry (SAP) and short-wavelength perimetry (SWAP) and optic disc topography was also assessed. RESULTS Motion automated perimetry superior visual field zones 14 through 19 were most often associated with a reduction in RAR for inferior sectors 24 through 29, and inferior visual field zones 4 through 7 were most often associated with a reduction in RAR for superior temporal sectors 11 through 16. Similar spatial relationships were found between SWAP and SAP and the RAR. CONCLUSION Focal MAP visual field loss and focal changes in optic disc topography are spatially related. This relationship is similar to that found between SWAP and SAP with optic disc topography. Focal thinning or notching detected by RAR analysis might be independent of the specific functional test employed.

Current practice with standard automated perimetry.

This article reviews standard visual field testing. The authors discuss the psychophysics involved in the design of the perimeter and the parameters used to test visual field sensitivity. The authors also explain normal and pathological sensitivity across the visual field, the patient and testing conditions that influence visual field results, and the interpretation of a single visual field, with an emphasis on detection of glaucomatous damage. The new thresholding program for visual fields, Swedish Interactive Thresholding Algorithm, is explained. Finally, the authors give examples of factors that should be considered when setting criteria for abnomality and review how recent studies have used various criteria to identify abnormality