Back to Journals » Clinical Ophthalmology » Volume 8

Frequency-doubling technology perimetry and multifocal visual evoked potential in glaucoma, suspected glaucoma, and control patients

Authors Kanadani F, Mello P, Dorairaj S, Kanadani TC

Received 23 March 2014

Accepted for publication 22 April 2014

Published 14 July 2014 Volume 2014:8 Pages 1323—1330

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/OPTH.S64684

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 4


Fabio N Kanadani,1 Paulo AA Mello,1 Syril K Dorairaj,2 Tereza CM Kanadani3

1Federal University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil; 2Mayo Clinic, Department of Ophthalmology, Jacksonville, Florida, USA; 3Sao Jose University Hospital, Belo Horizonte, Brazil

Introduction: The gold standard in functional glaucoma evaluation is standard automated perimetry (SAP). However, SAP depends on the reliability of the patients’ responses and other external factors; therefore, other technologies have been developed for earlier detection of visual field changes in glaucoma patients. The frequency-doubling perimetry (FDT) is believed to detect glaucoma earlier than SAP. The multifocal visual evoked potential (mfVEP) is an objective test for functional evaluation.
Objective: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of FDT and mfVEP tests in normal, suspect, and glaucomatous eyes and compare the monocular and interocuar mf VEP.
Methods: Ninety-five eyes from 95 individuals (23 controls, 33 glaucoma suspects, 39 glaucomatous) were enrolled. All participants underwent a full ophthalmic examination, followed by SAP, FDT, and mfVEP tests.
Results: The area under the curve for mean deviation and pattern standard deviation were 0.756 and 0.761, respectively, for FDT, 0.564 and 0.512 for signal and alpha for interocular mfVEP, and 0.568 and 0.538 for signal and alpha for monocular mfVEP. This difference between monocular and interocular mfVEP was not significant.
Conclusion: The FDT matrix was superior to mfVEP in glaucoma detection. The difference between monocular and interocular mfVEP in the diagnosis of glaucoma was not significant.

Keywords: standard automated perimetry, electrophysiology, glaucomatous eyes

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]