Archives of ophthalmology (Chicago, Ill. : 1960) · 2011
Visual field extent at 6 years of age in children who had high-risk prethreshold retinopathy of prematurity.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
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.
Quinn Graham E, Dobson Velma, Hardy Robert J, Tung Betty, Palmer Earl A, Good William V, Early Treatment for Retinopathy of Prematurity Cooperative Group
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare monocular visual field extent at 6 years of age in eyes with high-risk prethreshold retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) randomized to early treatment (ET) with eyes that underwent conventional management (CM) and were treated at threshold or regressed without treatment.
METHODS: Subjects were 370 surviving study participants who developed high-risk prethreshold ROP and were enrolled in the Early Treatment for Retinopathy of Prematurity Study between October 1, 2000, and September 30, 2002. When the participants were 6 years of age, vision testers unaware of ROP status used white-sphere kinetic perimetry to measure visual field extent along the superotemporal, inferotemporal, inferonasal, and superonasal meridians.
RESULTS: The extent of the visual field was 0.1° to 3.7° larger in ET eyes when blind eyes were assigned a score of 0°. When data were examined from eyes of participants with 1 sighted ET eye and 1 sighted CM eye, ET eyes showed a small (1.3°-3.1°) reduction, which was statistically significant only along the superonasal meridian (P = .005). In bilaterally sighted children, visual field extent was not significantly reduced for high-risk type 1 ET eyes (-0.9° to 1.8°). However, in ET eyes with high-risk type 2 disease, visual field extent was significantly smaller compared with that of CM eyes (3.6°-8.7° superonasal field [P = .003]; inferonasal field [P < .001]).
CONCLUSION: Early treatment preserves peripheral vision, with only a small reduction of visual field extent.
APPLICATION TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Early treatment for high-risk prethreshold ROP does not adversely affect visual field extent clinically.
METHODS: Subjects were 370 surviving study participants who developed high-risk prethreshold ROP and were enrolled in the Early Treatment for Retinopathy of Prematurity Study between October 1, 2000, and September 30, 2002. When the participants were 6 years of age, vision testers unaware of ROP status used white-sphere kinetic perimetry to measure visual field extent along the superotemporal, inferotemporal, inferonasal, and superonasal meridians.
RESULTS: The extent of the visual field was 0.1° to 3.7° larger in ET eyes when blind eyes were assigned a score of 0°. When data were examined from eyes of participants with 1 sighted ET eye and 1 sighted CM eye, ET eyes showed a small (1.3°-3.1°) reduction, which was statistically significant only along the superonasal meridian (P = .005). In bilaterally sighted children, visual field extent was not significantly reduced for high-risk type 1 ET eyes (-0.9° to 1.8°). However, in ET eyes with high-risk type 2 disease, visual field extent was significantly smaller compared with that of CM eyes (3.6°-8.7° superonasal field [P = .003]; inferonasal field [P < .001]).
CONCLUSION: Early treatment preserves peripheral vision, with only a small reduction of visual field extent.
APPLICATION TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Early treatment for high-risk prethreshold ROP does not adversely affect visual field extent clinically.