British journal of neurosurgery · 2021
The digital Cullen chart: a red colour perimetry aid for visual field examination.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Hughes Mark Antony, Ho Jen Wae, Keenlyside Andrew, Sieradzki Jake, Statham Patrick F X
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: 30 years ago, a paper chart was developed in Edinburgh by Cullen et al. and validated as a swift, supplementary method for perimetric evaluation of visual fields. We have re-developed this concept in digital form (on smartphone screen) and assessed its sensitivity and specificity in detecting visual field loss, by comparison with formal machine-based perimetry.
METHODS: Patients with sellar and parasellar tumours, being managed in a single neurosurgical centre, underwent formal visual field perimetry as part of standard care. They also underwent assessment using the smartphone-based Cullen chart. 37 eye testing episodes were assessed, incorporating pre- and post-treatment assessments for a range of potentially compressive pathologies (non-secretory and secretory pituitary adenoma, craniopharyngioma, and parasellar meningioma). The smartphone-based Cullen chart was compared with formal machine-based perimetry for concordance in detecting visual field loss.
RESULTS: The digital Cullen chart had a sensitivity of 75% and specificity of 98% compared with machine-based perimeters. The positive predictive value was 93% and the negative predictive value was 92%.
CONCLUSIONS: For the visual field assessment of patients with sellar/parasellar tumours, this simple and swift smartphone-based chart shows good concordance with machine-based perimeters. With amendments to the user interface, there may be potential for telemetric patient-led visual field monitoring.
METHODS: Patients with sellar and parasellar tumours, being managed in a single neurosurgical centre, underwent formal visual field perimetry as part of standard care. They also underwent assessment using the smartphone-based Cullen chart. 37 eye testing episodes were assessed, incorporating pre- and post-treatment assessments for a range of potentially compressive pathologies (non-secretory and secretory pituitary adenoma, craniopharyngioma, and parasellar meningioma). The smartphone-based Cullen chart was compared with formal machine-based perimetry for concordance in detecting visual field loss.
RESULTS: The digital Cullen chart had a sensitivity of 75% and specificity of 98% compared with machine-based perimeters. The positive predictive value was 93% and the negative predictive value was 92%.
CONCLUSIONS: For the visual field assessment of patients with sellar/parasellar tumours, this simple and swift smartphone-based chart shows good concordance with machine-based perimeters. With amendments to the user interface, there may be potential for telemetric patient-led visual field monitoring.