[Short-wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP) in patients with suspected glaucoma (II): correlation with a probabilistic multifactorial model of risk for developing glaucomatous damage].
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficiency and predictability of a multifactorial probability model to assess the risk of developing glaucomatous visual field defects and to determine the correlation between retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) photographs and short-wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP) in a population of patients suspected of having glaucoma.
METHODS
One hundred and sixty eyes belonging to 83 patients with ocular hypertension [ocular pressure figures over 21 mmHg and normal conventional automated perimetry (AP) (white-white)] were included in the study. The risk of developing glaucomatous defects was assessed by a multifactorial model that includes intraocular pressure. vertical cup-to-disk ratio, age and family background. RNFL photographs and SWAP tests were also performed.
RESULTS
SWAPs were pathological in 57 cases (35.6% of the sample); 23% of the perimetries were abnormal in the low-risk group while the moderate and high risk groups showed abnormal perimetries 38% and 56% respectively. The RNFL defects at the different risk levels were consistent with the SWAP results. The multiple regression analysis of the four variables included in the model showed the relationship among the risk factors, evaluated globally, and the presence of glaucomatous damage evaluated by RNFL and SWAP (p<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
The usefulness of this probability model as predictive indicator of subsequent glaucomatous damage is based on the good correlation between the risk scale and the RNFL and SWAP assessments. These techniques evaluate structural (RNFL) and functional (SWAP) changes in early stages of the glaucomatous disease.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.