青光眼标准视野与闪烁视野检查对比

Glaucoma patients undergoing standard automatic perimetry or flicker perimetry:A comparative study

目的分析青光眼患者标准视野检查（SAP）、闪烁视野检查结果，比较两种检查方式对不同分期青光眼患者检查的敏感性，研究闪烁视野检查在青光眼诊断中的价值。方法青光眼46例（69眼），男29例。女17例，平均年龄（55．41±16．58）岁。使用Octopus-900全视野计进行SAP和闪烁视野检查中的闪烁临界融合频率检查（CFF），根据SAP结果中的平均敏感度（MS）分期，比较不同分期SAP与CFF在青光眼诊断方面的敏感性。结果46例患者总体比较提示SAP优于CFF。将SAP结果中的MS按照每10dB一个分组，分为三组．A组：〈10dB组（含10dB），B组：10～20dB（含20dB）组，C组：〉20dB组。C组CFF检查敏感性高于SAP检查。而在A组和B组的比较中CFF并未显出优势。结论CFF诊断较早期青光眼患者的敏感性优于SAP。而在中、晚期患者其敏感性显著低于SAP。

Objective To analyze the results of White-white standard automatic perimeter （SAP） and flicker perimetery for check in glaucoma patients so as to evaluate the sensitivity of flicker perimetry in glaucoma patients at different stages as well as its diagnostic value. Methods The 46 glaucoma patients （29 males and 17 females,69 eyes） had taken standard automatic perimetery and flicker perimetery （critical fusion frequency,CFF） by using Octopus-900 perimeter （Switzerland Haag-Streit Company）. Their average age was 55.41＋16.58. According to the MS of SAP,they were again divided into three groups. Group A：less than 10dB （including 10dB）,Group B：between 10dB to 20dB（including 20dB）,and Group C：more than 20dB;Then compared with the results of SAP and CFF between groups by using fomula ldB=l.50Hz. Results In group C mean sensitivity （MS） for CFF was significantly lower than for SAP,but in group A and B on the other hand. Conclusion CFF is more sensitive than SAP in the early stage of glaucoma,but in advanced stage there is no superiority in CFF for diagnosing glaucoma.