Cargando…

Comparison of the Automated Pattern–Noise (PANO) Glaucoma Test with the HFA, an FDT Stimulus, and the Fundus Area Cup-to-disk Ratio

AIM AND OBJECTIVE: To compare the results of a new automated glaucoma test—Pattern–Noise (PANO)—to the Humphrey Visual Field Analyzer-II (HFA), the fundus area cup-to-disk ratio (CDR), and a frequency doubling technology (FDT) stimulus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective study performed i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hannen, Thomas, El-Khoury, Sylvain, Patel, Rajesh, Ngounou, Faustin, Preußner, Paul-Rolf
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8807941/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35173395
http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10078-1317
_version_ 1784643775834882048
author Hannen, Thomas
El-Khoury, Sylvain
Patel, Rajesh
Ngounou, Faustin
Preußner, Paul-Rolf
author_facet Hannen, Thomas
El-Khoury, Sylvain
Patel, Rajesh
Ngounou, Faustin
Preußner, Paul-Rolf
author_sort Hannen, Thomas
collection PubMed
description AIM AND OBJECTIVE: To compare the results of a new automated glaucoma test—Pattern–Noise (PANO)—to the Humphrey Visual Field Analyzer-II (HFA), the fundus area cup-to-disk ratio (CDR), and a frequency doubling technology (FDT) stimulus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective study performed in the West-Region of Cameroon. Two hundred and nineteen eyes of 122 adult patients were included with a clinical suspicion of normal-tension or primary open-angle glaucoma and no other major ocular pathology. Eyes were examined with PANO, HFA (24-2 SITA standard), and FDT-stimulus in a randomized order followed by clinical assessment of the CDR. RESULTS: Parametric correlation of the mean contrast threshold of PANO with the mean contrast threshold of FDT-stimulus, total deviation of HFA, and area CDR was 0.94, −0.85, and 0.62, respectively (p < 0.001 for all values). Spatial distribution of sensitivity thresholds is highly correlated (p < 0.001) at all points in the visual field between PANO and HFA. With cut-off values of 3 ± 1 dB for HFA mean deviation and 4 ± 1 for PANO mean contrast threshold and after eliminating borderline cases, PANO's sensitivity was 95% and specificity 60%. The mean patient age was 45.2 ± 15.8 years. Mean thresholds of PANO and FDT-stimulus decreased with increasing age. Mean examination time was 7.1 ± 1.8 minutes for PANO, 5.9 ± 1.3 minutes for HFA, and 4.7 ± 1.3 minutes for FDT-stimulus. The mean percentage of false-positives per examination was 4.95% for PANO, 4.62% (p = 0.025) for FDT-stimulus, and 2.10% for HFA. CONCLUSION: The results showed that PANO was successful in suspecting the presence of glaucoma. Pattern–Noise examination led to findings that were significantly correlated to HFA, FDT stimulus, and area CDR. Some patterns of defect were also correlated. Furthermore, PANO showed a reasonable examination time and error rate. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Affordable and robust visual field devices are lacking in large parts of the developing world. Comparing them to established methods is a prerequisite to their clinical use. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Hannen T, El-Khoury S, Patel R, et al. Comparison of the Automated Pattern–Noise (PANO) Glaucoma Test with the HFA, an FDT Stimulus, and the Fundus Area Cup-to-disk Ratio. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 2021;15(3):132–138.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8807941
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88079412022-02-15 Comparison of the Automated Pattern–Noise (PANO) Glaucoma Test with the HFA, an FDT Stimulus, and the Fundus Area Cup-to-disk Ratio Hannen, Thomas El-Khoury, Sylvain Patel, Rajesh Ngounou, Faustin Preußner, Paul-Rolf J Curr Glaucoma Pract Original Research AIM AND OBJECTIVE: To compare the results of a new automated glaucoma test—Pattern–Noise (PANO)—to the Humphrey Visual Field Analyzer-II (HFA), the fundus area cup-to-disk ratio (CDR), and a frequency doubling technology (FDT) stimulus. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective study performed in the West-Region of Cameroon. Two hundred and nineteen eyes of 122 adult patients were included with a clinical suspicion of normal-tension or primary open-angle glaucoma and no other major ocular pathology. Eyes were examined with PANO, HFA (24-2 SITA standard), and FDT-stimulus in a randomized order followed by clinical assessment of the CDR. RESULTS: Parametric correlation of the mean contrast threshold of PANO with the mean contrast threshold of FDT-stimulus, total deviation of HFA, and area CDR was 0.94, −0.85, and 0.62, respectively (p < 0.001 for all values). Spatial distribution of sensitivity thresholds is highly correlated (p < 0.001) at all points in the visual field between PANO and HFA. With cut-off values of 3 ± 1 dB for HFA mean deviation and 4 ± 1 for PANO mean contrast threshold and after eliminating borderline cases, PANO's sensitivity was 95% and specificity 60%. The mean patient age was 45.2 ± 15.8 years. Mean thresholds of PANO and FDT-stimulus decreased with increasing age. Mean examination time was 7.1 ± 1.8 minutes for PANO, 5.9 ± 1.3 minutes for HFA, and 4.7 ± 1.3 minutes for FDT-stimulus. The mean percentage of false-positives per examination was 4.95% for PANO, 4.62% (p = 0.025) for FDT-stimulus, and 2.10% for HFA. CONCLUSION: The results showed that PANO was successful in suspecting the presence of glaucoma. Pattern–Noise examination led to findings that were significantly correlated to HFA, FDT stimulus, and area CDR. Some patterns of defect were also correlated. Furthermore, PANO showed a reasonable examination time and error rate. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Affordable and robust visual field devices are lacking in large parts of the developing world. Comparing them to established methods is a prerequisite to their clinical use. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Hannen T, El-Khoury S, Patel R, et al. Comparison of the Automated Pattern–Noise (PANO) Glaucoma Test with the HFA, an FDT Stimulus, and the Fundus Area Cup-to-disk Ratio. J Curr Glaucoma Pract 2021;15(3):132–138. Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8807941/ /pubmed/35173395 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10078-1317 Text en Copyright © 2021; The Author(s). https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/© The Author(s). 2021 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and non-commercial reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Original Research
Hannen, Thomas
El-Khoury, Sylvain
Patel, Rajesh
Ngounou, Faustin
Preußner, Paul-Rolf
Comparison of the Automated Pattern–Noise (PANO) Glaucoma Test with the HFA, an FDT Stimulus, and the Fundus Area Cup-to-disk Ratio
title Comparison of the Automated Pattern–Noise (PANO) Glaucoma Test with the HFA, an FDT Stimulus, and the Fundus Area Cup-to-disk Ratio
title_full Comparison of the Automated Pattern–Noise (PANO) Glaucoma Test with the HFA, an FDT Stimulus, and the Fundus Area Cup-to-disk Ratio
title_fullStr Comparison of the Automated Pattern–Noise (PANO) Glaucoma Test with the HFA, an FDT Stimulus, and the Fundus Area Cup-to-disk Ratio
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the Automated Pattern–Noise (PANO) Glaucoma Test with the HFA, an FDT Stimulus, and the Fundus Area Cup-to-disk Ratio
title_short Comparison of the Automated Pattern–Noise (PANO) Glaucoma Test with the HFA, an FDT Stimulus, and the Fundus Area Cup-to-disk Ratio
title_sort comparison of the automated pattern–noise (pano) glaucoma test with the hfa, an fdt stimulus, and the fundus area cup-to-disk ratio
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8807941/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35173395
http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp-journals-10078-1317
work_keys_str_mv AT hannenthomas comparisonoftheautomatedpatternnoisepanoglaucomatestwiththehfaanfdtstimulusandthefundusareacuptodiskratio
AT elkhourysylvain comparisonoftheautomatedpatternnoisepanoglaucomatestwiththehfaanfdtstimulusandthefundusareacuptodiskratio
AT patelrajesh comparisonoftheautomatedpatternnoisepanoglaucomatestwiththehfaanfdtstimulusandthefundusareacuptodiskratio
AT ngounoufaustin comparisonoftheautomatedpatternnoisepanoglaucomatestwiththehfaanfdtstimulusandthefundusareacuptodiskratio
AT preußnerpaulrolf comparisonoftheautomatedpatternnoisepanoglaucomatestwiththehfaanfdtstimulusandthefundusareacuptodiskratio