A comparison of Peritest automated perimetry and Goldmann perimetry
M. L. Hotchkiss, A. L. Robin, H. A. Quigley and I. P. Pollack
Both Peritest perimetry and Goldmann visual field testing were performed on
three groups of eyes. Eighty-one eyes had glaucoma with elevated
intraocular pressures and abnormal visual fields determined by Goldmann
perimetry. There were 47 eyes with suspected glaucoma, based on elevated
IOPs and normal Goldmann visual fields. Nineteen eyes were normal. All
visual fields were evaluated in masked fashion, and the results were
compared. The Peritest had a high sensitivity in both glaucomatous (98.8%)
and normal (94.7%) eyes. One half of the eyes with suspected glaucoma had
abnormal Peritest results but normal Goldmann visual fields. These eyes
were examined prospectively with color stereo discs and monochromatic nerve
fiber layer photographs. One half of the eyes with suspected glaucoma and
abnormal Peritest results also had photographic evidence suggesting optic
nerve damage. Thus, early field defects detected by the Peritest perimeter
in eyes with suspected glaucoma are likely to be representative of
glaucomatous damage.
