Humphrey matrix frequency doubling perimetry for detection of visual field defects in open-angle glaucoma
- Colin I Clement (colinc{at}gmp.usyd.edu.au),
- Ivan Goldberg,
- Stuart Graham,
- Paul R Healey
- Sydney Eye Hospital, Australia
- Sydney Eye Hospital, Australia
- Eye Associates, Australia
- Eye Associates, Australia
- Published Online First 31 July 2008
Abstract
Purpose: Matrix perimetry uses frequency-doubling technology (FDT) incorporated into a 5-degree test target. This permits testing of the same number of locations within a defined visual field as standard automated perimetry (SAP) and may improve performance compared with original FDT perimetry. This study investigates the performance of Humphrey Matrix perimetry for detecting glaucomatous visual field loss.
Design: Prospective case control study.
Methods: We recruited 118 participants with glaucomatous visual field loss and 33 normal controls from an urban glaucoma practice. Each participant performed SITA 24-2 SAP then threshold 24-2 Matrix perimetry. Severity of visual field loss was defined using SAP mean deviation [MD] as early (MD > -6dB), moderate (MD –6 to -12dB) or advanced (MD < -12dB). The sensitivity and specificity of Humphrey Matrix perimetry was calculated for different automated indices.
Results: Matrix perimetry sensitivity and specificity was up to 100% for moderate and advanced glaucomatous visual field loss. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis revealed MD to be slightly better than PSD for defining moderate (AUC: MD 0.9968; PSD 0.9855) and advanced defects (AUC: MD 1.000; PSD 0.9865). Matrix was less sensitive (up to 87.3%) for detecting early glaucomatous visual field loss compared with SITA 24-2 SAP (ROC AUC: PSD 0.9484; MD 0.9097).
Conclusions: Matrix perimetry is excellent for detection of moderate to advanced glaucomatous visual field loss but may miss some early defects. It may be well suited to following progression of field loss because of a smaller target size compared with original FDT perimetry.
