两种快速静态视野检查法临床应用比较

Clinical Comparison Between TOP and DYNAMIC Automated Static Perimetry

目的比较两种快速静态阈值测定法 ,趋势导向视野检测法 (TOP)与动态平衡视野测定法 (DYNAMIC)临床应用特点及价值。 方法应用OCTOPUS 10 1视野计对 6 1例患者进行TOP与DYNAMIC程序视野测定。 结果TOP程序平均用时 2 .71min ,DYNAMIC程序 7.2 0min。二者测得平均缺损、假阳性率无显著差异 ;缺损方差、假阴性率存在统计学差异。两种方法测得结果有可比性。 结论TOP与DYNAMIC均为有效短时程视野程序。前者适用于各种病情总体阈值测试 ,后者倾向于局灶性视野改变的测定与随访。

Objective To compare and evaluate two fast automated static perimetry, TOP and DYNAMIC, used in clinic and their evaluation. Methods Sixty-one patients with normal or different kinds of visual field abnormalities accepted both TOP and DYNAMIC examinations by Octopus 101 perimetry. Results The mean examination time of TOP was 2.71min while DYNAMIC was 7.20 min. MS, MD and false positive rate showed no statistical significant difference, while LV and false negative rate did. Two fast exam methods were comparable. Conclusion Both TOP and DYNAMIC are effective fast visual field testing. TOP is suitable to threshold scanning or testing for all kinds of diseases; DYNAMIC is appropriate to regional or focal visual field measuring and follow-up.