 |
|
Short-Wavelength Sensitivity Deficits in Patients With Migraine
Allison M. McKendrick, PhD;
George A. Cioffi, MD;
Chris A. Johnson, PhD
Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120:154-161.
ABSTRACT
| |
Objective To examine short-wavelength sensitivity in patients with migraine using
short-wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP) and Stiles 2-color increment threshold
procedures.
Methods Twenty-five subjects with migraine with (n = 11) and without (n = 14)
aura and 20 age-matched headache-free subjects underwent testing. All subjects
underwent standard automated perimetry (SAP) and SWAP (using a Humphrey field
analyzer; 24-2 presentation pattern). In 2 migraine patients (one with and
another without aura), the 2-color increment threshold procedure was used
to determine whether sensitivity losses were specific to short-wavelength
sensitivity pathways or a generalized loss to multiple pathways.
Results No statistically significant differences between migraine patients and
controls were found for mean deviation (MD) or pattern-standard deviation
(PSD) for SAP. However, for SWAP, MD and PSD were worse for the migraine group
(P = .04). Twelve migraine patients had more than
4 locations with sensitivity worse than the 5% probability level (reference
value). Increment threshold determinations in the 2 selected migraine patients
indicated a selectively greater loss for short-wavelength sensitivity mechanisms.
Conclusions Approximately 50% of subjects with migraine (with or without aura) demonstrate
SWAP sensitivity losses, at times between migraine events. These findings,
in conjunction with previous results for SAP and flicker perimetry, suggest
that migraine patients should be excluded from normative databases of visual
function, and warrant further investigations of the relationship between migraine
and glaucoma.
INTRODUCTION
BETWEEN MIGRAINE events, the visual fields of many individuals with
migraine (hereafter described as migraine patients) are abnormal, with deficits
being demonstrated for achromatic perimetry1-2
and temporal modulation (flicker) perimetry.3
Because the symptoms of migrainous visual aura are consistent with a cortical
origin4 and are accompanied by changes in blood
flow within cortical areas responsible for vision,5-7
other visual field deficits associated with migraine would be expected to
be cortical. Although reports of homonymous deficits exist,8-10
these are the exception. Most deficits are reported to be unilateral and nonhomonymous,1, 3, 11 which implies involvement
of the prestriate visual pathways. Functional deficits have also been identified
in migraine patients using psychophysical methods that measure prestriate
function.12-13
The potential significance of visual field loss in migraine patients
should be considered in light of evidence of an increased prevalence of migraine
in patients with glaucoma.14-17
However, this finding has not been universal.18-19
Vasospastic disorders, including migraine, have been suggested to be more
common in individuals with glaucoma, and these conditions may share etiologic
factors such as abnormalities in vascular regulation.20-24
Although a relationship between migraine and glaucoma may exist, prestriate
visual field deficits have been demonstrated between migraine attacks in young
migraine patients with normal intraocular pressures and optic disc appearance.3
Although visual field deficits have been demonstrated in migraine patients
using standard achromatic perimetry (SAP),1, 11
more substantial visual field loss has been identified using flicker perimetry,3 a technique that has also been shown to be effective
in detecting glaucomatous visual field loss.25-28
These tests are designed to assess the magnocellular pathways, which are likely
to be sensitive for early loss because these cells are sparse (approximately
10%-20% of ganglion cells29-30).
Therefore, if even a small proportion of neurons are affected by disease,
a deficit may be manifest owing to reduced redundancy.31
Other visual mechanisms that are sparsely represented may also manifest
deficits in migraine patients, particularly the short-wavelength sensitivity
(SWS) pathways. The SWS deficits have been demonstrated in glaucoma,32-33 diabetes,34-38
and retinitis pigmentosa.34, 39
The SWS pathways may be sensitive to damage, as SWS photoreceptors are particularly
susceptible to vascular insult and light damage.38, 40
However, the presence of SWS pathway deficits in a wide variety of diseases
implies receptoral and postreceptoral (involving the SWS neural pathways)
sites of damage. Psychophysical evidence of damage at postreceptoral sites
has been measured in diabetic patients.41 Alternatively,
a non–SWS-specific loss may be manifest earlier in the sparsely represented
SWS system owing to reduced redundancy.31 The
sensitivity of the SWS pathway is commonly assessed in glaucoma using short-wavelength
automated perimetry (SWAP).32-33
This method has been shown to be superior to SAP for detection of early functional
glaucomatous damage.32, 42-44
In this study, SWAP was used to measure the sensitivity of the SWS pathway
across the central visual field. In 2 migraine patients who demonstrated SWAP
deficits, the sensitivities of SWS (blue/pi-1) and middle-wavelength sensitivity
(MWS) (green/pi-4) pathways were compared using the Stiles 2-color increment
threshold technique45 to determine whether
a selective loss of SWS pathway sensitivity or losses in MWS pathway sensitivity
were present. Two-color increment thresholds have been used previously to
demonstrate selective losses of SWS pathway sensitivity in early diabetic
retinopathy34, 36 and deficits
in MWS and SWS pathway sensitivity in glaucoma and retinitis pigmentosa.34, 36
PATIENTS AND METHODS
Twenty-five individuals with a history of migraine participated in the
study. Migraines were classifed as with (n = 11) and without (n = 14) aura
to meet the classification criteria of the International Headache Society.46 All subjects in the aura group had visual symptoms.
The test protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Legacy
Health Systems, Portland, Ore, and all subjects gave written informed consent
before commencement of the test procedures, in accordance with the tenets
of the Declaration of Helsinki.
The control group consisted of 20 subjects free of headache as established
by means of a questionnaire and a clinical interview. Subjects were aged 18
to 40 years. No statistically significant difference was found among the mean
(± SD) ages of the 3 groups (migraine patients with aura, 32.4 ±
5.9 years; migraine patients without aura, 27.7 ± 6.5 years; and controls,
29.9 ± 5.6 years; analysis of variance, P
= .16). Migraine patients and controls were recruited from within Legacy Health
Systems or by means of advertisement in local newspapers. Three migraine patients
(2 patients with aura and 1 without), and 4 controls were recruited from within
our laboratory. Only these subjects had previous SAP experience. Only 1 subject
had previous SWAP experience.
A routine eye examination was performed to ensure that all subjects
had normal optic disc appearance, intraocular pressure of less than 21 mm
Hg, results of slitlamp examination within the reference range, visual acuity
of 20/20 or better, and refractive errors of less than 6.00 diopters (D) sphere
and 2.00 D cylinder. Subjects were required to be free of systemic disease
and systemic medications known to affect visual function. None of the migraine
patients was receiving preventive drug therapy.
Migraine patients underwent testing at least 4 days after a migraine
to minimize possible transient effects on performance due to medications,
nausea, or postmigraine fatigue.
We performed SAP and SWAP using a Humphrey field analyzer II (Model
750; Humphrey Systems, Dublin, Calif). For SAP, we used a Goldmann size III
white target projected on a 31.5-apostilb (asb) (10 candelas per square meter
[cd/m2]) white background. For SWAP, we used a Goldmann size V
blue target (Omega 440-nm interference filter) projected on a 315-asb (100
cd/m2) yellow background (Schott OG530 filter; Coherent, Inc, Auburn,
Calif). These SWAP test conditions provide approximately 17 dB of isolation
of the SWS mechanisms throughout the central visual field.47
We used the 24-2 test pattern for SAP and SWAP. We used the Swedish Interactive
Threshold Algorithm standard strategy for SAP and the full threshold strategy
for SWAP.
Subjects underwent SAP first on each eye, followed by a brief rest,
and then SWAP.
The Humphrey field analyzer II statistical analyses use an internal
normative database. Current migraine prevalence estimates suggest approximately
12% to 15% of the "normal" subjects included in the database may have migraine,48-51 thereby
confounding comparisons of visual field performance in migraine patients with
those of migraine-free subjects. To avoid this problem, we included test results
of age-matched controls who were known to be migraine free, and visual field
indices and individual sensitivity values were compared between groups. Right-
and left-eye data were analyzed separately to determine whether unilateral
or bilateral involvement was present.
Group comparisons were performed using the mean deviation (MD) and the
pattern-standard deviation (PSD) visual field indices. Groups were compared
using a t test. Because of multiple comparisons and
the likelihood of correlation between the measures, we used the Hochberg step-up
multiplicity adjustment procedure52-53
to determine statistical significance while maintaining an overall type I
error rate of P = .05. Performance on SAP and SWAP
were considered separately; hence the Hochberg procedure was applied twice,
each time with 4 measures (MD and PSD for right and left eyes).
Individual migraine subject performance was also analyzed on a pointwise
basis, using the control group to determine a 95% confidence interval for
each point in the visual field. If the thresholds at individual points are
independent (which they may not be), the probability that n points (from of a total of N) fall below
the lower confidence limit (CL) is determined using the following equation54:
where  is the probability an individual
point will fall outside the control CL ( = .025), and NCn is the binomial coefficient
that determines the number of uniquely different ways in which a subset of n points may be chosen from a larger set of N points and is equivalent to N!/[n!(N - n)!].
The factorial expansion is signified by !, which determines the number of
ways that a set of numbers can be ordered and is equal to N! = N x (N -
1) x (N - 2) x (N - 3) x ... x 3 x 2 x 1, where N is a positive integer.
For the 24-2 test pattern, the number of test points is 54. The points
above and below the blind spot were excluded from analysis, resulting in 52
points. From equation 1, visual fields were judged to be abnormal (P<.05) if they had 4 or more points below our lower CL (P = .025 for a single point) determined from the control data.
We used a modified Humphrey field analyzer I to perform a Stiles 2-color
increment threshold procedure to assess SWS (blue) and MWS (green) pathway
sensitivity. We measured thresholds using a Goldmann size V blue target superimposed
on a yellow background (Schott OG530 filter).55
Conditions were selected to measure Stiles pi-4 (MWS) and pi-1 (SWS) mechanisms.45 This concept has been described in detail by Demirel
and Johnson.55 For low-luminance yellow backgrounds,
detection of a large blue target is mediated by MWS pathways (or rods if very
low luminances). For the SWS mechanism to become responsible for detection
of the blue target, sensitivity of the MWS mechanism must be reduced. This
reduction is achieved by displaying a bright yellow background. Adaptation
to the bright yellow background reduces the sensitivity of the MWS pathway,
and the SWS mechanism becomes responsible for detection of the blue target.
If sensitivity to the blue target is measured at a range of yellow background
intensities (from dim to very bright), a characteristic 2-branch curve is
obtained as illustrated schematically in Figure 1. It is well documented that the lower branch represents
detection by MWS mechanisms, and the upper branch, detection by SWS mechanisms.45
|
|
|
|
Figure 1. Schematic of a threshold-vs-intensity
curve for detection of a large blue target displayed on a yellow background.
At low background luminances, detection is mediated by middle-wavelength sensitivity
(MWS) mechanisms. At high background luminances, the short-wavelength sensitivity
(SWS) mechanisms become responsible for detection.
|
|
|
Thresholds to the blue target were measured at 16 adapting field intensities,
beginning at 0.1 cd/m2. After 10 minutes of dark adaptation, thresholds
were measured at 2 locations (one of normal SWAP sensitivity, and the other
of reduced SWAP sensitivity at the same eccentricity) using the Humphrey full-threshold
algorithm. Thresholds were measured twice at each location for each background
intensity, and the mean of both measurements was taken as the final threshold.
After each increment in background intensity, 2 minutes of adaptation to the
new background was required before measuring thresholds.
The background intensity levels and the mean thresholds provided by
the Humphrey field analyzer at each background intensity were converted to
quantum units (quanta · sec-1· degree-2) as recommended by Wyszecki and Stiles,45
using the method detailed by Sample et al.47
The threshold-vs-intensity (TVI) curves were the best fit of the following
equation56-57:
where I is the increment threshold; A, the ordinate intercept; I, the background
intensity; Ie, the background intensity
where the TVI curve begins to adapt; and n, the exponent that describes the
slope of the function.
RESULTS
Figure 2 presents the MD and
PSD values for SAP and SWAP for the migraine (with and without aura) patient
and control groups. The significance level of the t
tests after adjustment by means of the Hochberg procedure are also given in Figure 2. No significant difference was found
between the group means for MD or PSD for SAP. However, for SWAP, significant
differences were present between the combined migraine and the control groups
for MD and PSD.
|
|
|
|
Figure 2. Box plots of mean deviation (MD;
A and B) and pattern-standard deviation (PSD; C and D) for standard automated
perimetry (SAP; A and C) and short-wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP; B
and D). Data are presented for right and left eyes in migraine and control
groups. Probability levels for group mean comparisons are also presented.
Boxes represent the 25th, 50th (median), and 75th quantiles; whiskers, the
10th and 90th quantiles. Data falling outside the range of the 10th to 90th
quantiles are represented by solid symbols.
|
|
|
For SAP, 5 (20%) of 25 migraine patients had 4 or more points outside
the lower bounds of the control group 95% CL. Within this group of 5 subjects,
3 had bilateral and 2 had unilateral involvement. The bilateral involvement
was not homonymous and not obviously consistent with a cortical origin. For
SWAP, 12 (48%) of 25 migraine patients had 4 or more points outside the lower
bounds of the control group 95% CL. Of this group of 12 patients, 6 had unilateral
and 6 had bilateral deficits. Six of the subjects had the depressed locations
clustered in the superior arcuate nerve-fiber bundle region, 3 had abnormal
locations clustered in the inferior arcuate nerve-fiber bundle region, and
3 had scattered locations of loss. None of the subjects had bilateral homonymous
deficits. None of the controls had 4 or more points outside the 95% CLs for
SAP or SWAP.
Table 1 shows the number
of subjects in each migraine group with abnormal performance measured on a
pointwise basis for SAP and SWAP. Inspection of Table 1 shows similar involvement in both migraine groups. No significant
difference was found between the migraine groups for MD or PSD on SAP or SWAP
(t test, P>.05). This result
should be viewed with caution, as our limited sample size (11 migraine patients
with and 14 without aura) results in a power of 0.70 to detect a difference
of 2 dB. Nevertheless, no trend for different performance was found between
the migraine groups.
|
|
|
|
Subjects With Visual Field Deficits
|
|
|
We measured TVI curves for 2 migraine patients, one with and one without
aura, who had abnormal performance on SWAP. Both subjects demonstrated normal
thresholds for SAP.
The migraine patient with aura was a 28-year-old woman with a typical
migraine frequency of 2 weeks. Her initial SWAP visual field assessment was
conducted 9 days after migraine (Figure 3A). She returned on 2 further occasions for measurement of TVI curves.
These visits were performed 24 hours and 14 days after the same migraine.
On both occasions, increment threshold data were collected for her left eye
at a relatively depressed visual field location (3° nasal and 9° superior)
and a location of normal sensitivity at the same eccentricity (3° nasal
and 9° inferior). The increment threshold data collected at 24 hours after
migraine is displayed in Figure 3B
and at 14 days after migraine in Figure 3C.
|
|
|
|
Figure 3. Left eye short-wavelength automated
perimetry visual field performance measured 9 days after migraine in a patient
with migraine with aura (A). Increment threshold data were measured 24 hours
(B) and 9 days (C) after migraine in the left eye of the same subject. Solid
symbols represent thresholds measured at a location of normal sensitivity
(3° nasal and 9° inferior); open symbols, thresholds for a location
of depressed sensitivity (3° nasal and 9° superior). MD indicates
mean deviation; PSD, pattern-standard deviation.
|
|
|
The migraine patient without aura was an 18-year-old woman with a typical
migraine frequency of 1 month. Her initial SWAP visual field was measured
2 weeks after migraine (Figure 4A).
She returned for 2 further examinations to measure increment threshold data,
at 6 days and 3 weeks after the same migraine. Increment thresholds were measured
at 3° nasal and 9° superior and at 3° temporal and 9° inferior
in her left eye. The increment threshold data collected at 6 days after migraine
is displayed in Figure 4B and at
3 weeks after migraine in Figure 4C.
|
|
|
|
Figure 4. Left eye short-wavelength automated
perimetry visual field performance measured 2 weeks after migraine in a patient
with migraine without aura (A). Increment threshold data were measured 6 days
(B) and 3 weeks (C) after migraine in the left eye of the same subject. Solid
symbols represent thresholds measured at a location of normal sensitivity
(3° nasal and 9° superior); open symbols, thresholds for a location
of depressed sensitivity (3° temporal and 9° inferior). MD indicates
mean deviation; PSD, pattern-standard deviation.
|
|
|
Both migraine patients show sensitivity losses for MWS and SWS pathways;
however, the relative loss of SWS pathway function was greater than that of
the MWS pathway. The logarithm decrease in sensitivity at background intensities
of 7 quanta · sec-1· degree-2
(a measure of MWS pathway function) and 9 quanta · sec-1· degree-2 (a measure of SWS pathway function)
for the affected location of visual field is plotted in Figure 5. For each subject, the data presented are the mean of the
2 visits. Figure 5 demonstrates
the relatively greater loss of SWS pathway function in these 2 individuals.
|
|
|
|
Figure 5. Logarithm threshold difference
in sensitivity between the normal and depressed region of visual field for
the 2 patients with migraine described in Figure 3 and Figure 4. The measures
of short (SWS) and middle-wavelength sensitivity (MWS) pathway functions were
determined at 9 and 7 quanta · sec-1· degree-2, respectively. The data are the mean of 2 measures, as shown
in Figure 3B-C and Figure 4B-C.
|
|
|
COMMENT
The SWS deficits were common in migraine patients (12/25 [48%]) when
compared with a group of headache-free subjects of similar age. The visual
field loss was suggestive of prestriate rather than cortical involvement,
as there was an absence of bilateral homonymous deficits. This does not necessarily
exclude cortical involvement; however, we found no direct evidence of such
involvement in our subject group. Migraine patients with and without visual
aura showed similar degrees of loss (Table
1, Figure 3 and Figure 4), suggesting that the visual field
deficits are independent of the cortical involvement present during the aura
phase of the attack.
Migraine patients are reported to demonstrate increased susceptibility
to glare and ocular discomfort between attacks, and these hypersensitivities
may arise owing to interruptions in cortical inhibition.58-60
No evidence of hypersensitivity was found in our migraine group, and subjects
did not report excessive discomfort during assessment. As our experiments
were not designed specifically to consider these issues, we cannot rule out
the possibility of heightened aversive responses in our migraine group resulting
in losses of concentration and elevated thresholds. Visual discomfort in migraine
patients has been demonstrated previously for foveal viewing using grating
stimuli of 3 to 4 cycles per degree.59-60
However, our measures were for spot targets in the periphery, and we think
cortical hypersensitivity to illusory stimuli was unlikely to be a significant
factor in the visual dysfunction measured in this study.
The mechanism and site of SWS loss in migraine remains to be elucidated.
Increment threshold data from 2 subjects (Figure 3 and Figure 4)
suggest that the SWS pathway is more affected than the MWS pathway, although
a larger cohort of subjects must undergo testing. The SWS pathways are particularly
vulnerable to retinal disease, with evidence of dysfunction of the photoreceptors
and postreceptoral sites. In diabetes, metabolic abnormalities and hypoxia
are thought to contribute to the selective SWS pathway deficits in early diabetic
retinopathy.34 Abnormalities in ocular vascular
regulation may be present in migraine, as abnormalities in cold-induced vascular
regulation in the finger have been reported in migraine patients.61-62 Although recent studies of cortical
function find no evidence of ischemia during migraine events,63-64
similar studies have not been performed to verify the presence or absence
of peripheral hypoxia during the course of a migraine or at other times.
What is the clinical significance of SWS loss in migraine? Although
visual dysfunction in migraine likely arises owing to attrition caused by
disease, at present no data support or reject this hypothesis. Longitudinal
data are required to determine whether such visual field deficits are transient
or permanent, or whether they are progressive. A relationship between time
after migraine and visual field deficit severity has been reported using kinetic
perimetry,2 and using flicker perimetry for
several individual patients.3, 65
Most estimates of migraine prevalence range from 12% to 15%, with the
prevalence for women being about twice that for men.48-51
Although visual field studies have only been conducted on small samples of
migraine patients, reports suggest that 20% to 40% demonstrate visual field
deficits for SAP,1, 3, 11
approximately 67% for flicker perimetry,3 and
about 48% (12/25) for SWAP (present study). If these estimates are representative
of migrain patients, we predict that 2.5% to 7% of the general population
may demonstrate some form of visual field abnormality in association with
migraine.
The possibility of large numbers of migraine patients demonstrating
abnormal visual fields raises several interesting issues. First, migraine
patients should be excluded from normative databases of visual performance.
The high prevalence of SWAP sensitivity loss in migraine patients may account
for part of the greater individual variability for SWAP compared with SAP.66-68 Second, a challenge
remains in determining the relationship, if any, between prestriate visual
dysfunction in migraine and glaucoma. Migraine has been suggested as a vascular
risk factor for glaucoma20-24;
however, the relationship between these conditions is not a simple one. Primary
open-angle glaucoma affects approximately 3% of the population older than
40 years.69-70 Within this glaucomatous
population, estimates of migraine prevalence vary, but most range from 17%
to 25%.14-15,19, 71
Hence, approximately 0.6% of the general population has glaucoma and migraine.
Within the general population, 2.5% to 7% may have visual field dysfunction
in association with migraine in the presence of normal optic nerve appearance
and normal intraocular pressure. Whether this group of patients has a higher
risk for glaucoma is currently unknown.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Accepted for publication September 5, 2001.
Supported in part by research grant EY-03424 from the National Eye Institute,
Bethesda, Md (Dr Johnson).
Corresponding author and reprints: Chris A. Johnson, PhD, Discoveries
in Sight, Devers Eye Institute, Legacy Clinical Research and Technology Center,
1225 NE Second Ave, PO Box 3950, Portland, OR 97208-3950 (e-mail: cajohnso{at}discoveriesinsight.org).
From the Devers Eye Institute, Legacy Clinical Research and Technology
Center, Portland, Ore.
REFERENCES
| |
1. Lewis RA, Vijayan N, Watson C, Keltner J, Johnson CA. Visual field loss in migraine. Ophthalmology. 1989;96:321-326.
ISI
| PUBMED
2. Drummond PD, Anderson M. Visual field loss after attacks of migraine with aura. Cephalalgia. 1992;12:349-352.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
3. McKendrick AM, Vingrys AJ, Badcock DR, Heywood JT. Visual field losses in subjects with migraine headaches. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:1239-1247.
FREE FULL TEXT
4. Grusser O. Migraine phosphenes and the retino-cortical magnification factor. Vision Res. 1995;35:1125-1134.
FULL TEXT
| PUBMED
5. Sanchez del Rio M, Bakker D, Wu O, et al. Perfusion weighted imaging during migraine: spontaneous visual aura
and headache. Cephalalgia. 1999;19:701-707.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
6. Andersson JL, Muhr C, Lilja A, Valind S, Lundberg PO, Langstrom B. Regional cerebral blood flow and oxygen metabolism during migraine
with and without aura. Cephalalgia. 1997;17:570-579.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
7. Olesen J, Larsen B, Lauritzen M. Focal hyperemia followed by spreading oligemia and impaired activation
of rCBF in classic migraine. Ann Neurol. 1981;9:344-352.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
8. Bowerman LS. Transient visual field loss secondary to migraine. J Am Optom Assoc. 1989;60:912-916.
PUBMED
9. Ebner R. Visual field examination during transient migrainous visual loss. J Clin Neuroophthalmol. 1991;11:114-117.
PUBMED
10. Wakakura M, Ichibe Y. Permanent homonymous hemianopias following migraine. J Clin Neuroophthalmol. 1992;12:198-202.
PUBMED
11. De Natale R, Polimeni D, Narbone MC, Scullica MG, Pelicano M. Visual field defects in migraine patients. In: Mills RP, ed. Perimetry Update 93/94.
Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Kugler Publishers; 1994:283-284.
12. McKendrick AM, Vingrys AJ, Badcock DR, Heywood JT. Visual dysfunction in migraine. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:1404-1410.
FREE FULL TEXT
13. Coleston DM, Chronicle E, Ruddock KH, Kennard C. Precortical dysfunction of spatial and temporal visual processing in
migraine. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1994;57:1208-1211.
FREE FULL TEXT
14. Cursiefen C, Wisse M, Cursiefen S, Junemann A, Martus P, Korth M. Migraine and tension headache in high-pressure and normal-pressure
glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol. 2000;129:102-104.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
15. Wang JJ, Mitchell P, Smith W. Is there an association between migraine headache and open-angle glaucoma?
findings from the Blue Mountains Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 1997;104:1714-1719.
ISI
| PUBMED
16. Phelps CD, Corbett JJ. Migraine and low-tension glaucoma: a case-control study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1985;26:1105-1108.
FREE FULL TEXT
17. Corbett JJ, Phelps CD, Eslinger P, Montague PR. The neurologic evaluation of patients with low-tension glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1985;26:1101-1104.
FREE FULL TEXT
18. Klein BE, Klein R, Meuer SM, Goetz LA. Migraine headache and its association with open-angle glaucoma: the
Beaver Dam Eye Study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;34:3024-3027.
FREE FULL TEXT
19. Usui T, Iwata K, Shirakashi M, Abe H. Prevalence of migraine in low-tension glaucoma and primary open-angle
glaucoma in Japanese. Br J Ophthalmol. 1991;75:224-226.
FREE FULL TEXT
20. Flammer J, Orgul S. Optic nerve blood-flow abnormalities in glaucoma. Prog Retin Eye Res. 1998;17:267-289.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
21. Flammer J. Psychophysical mechanisms and treatment of vasospastic disorders in
normal-tension glaucoma. Bull Soc Belge Ophtalmol. 1992;244:129-134.
PUBMED
22. Broadway DC, Drance SM. Glaucoma and vasospasm. Br J Ophthalmol. 1998;82:862-870.
FREE FULL TEXT
23. Drance SM, Douglas GR, Wijsman K, Schulzer M, Britton RJ. Response of blood flow to warm and cold in normal and low-tension glaucoma
patients. Am J Ophthalmol. 1988;105:35-39.
ISI
| PUBMED
24. Nicolela MT, Drance SM. Various glaucomatous optic nerve appearances: clinical correlations. Ophthalmology. 1996;103:640-649.
ISI
| PUBMED
25. Casson EJ, Johnson CA, Shapiro LR. Longitudinal comparison of temporal-modulation perimetry with white-on-white
and blue-on-yellow perimetry in ocular hypertension and early glaucoma. J Opt Soc Am A. 1993;10:1792-1806.
ISI
| PUBMED
26. Sample PA, Bosworth CF, Weinreb RN. Short-wavelength automated perimetry and motion automated perimetry
in patients with glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 1997;115:1129-1133.
FREE FULL TEXT
27. Wall M, Ketoff K. Random dot motion perimetry in patients with glaucoma and in normal
subjects. Am J Ophthalmol. 1995;120:587-596.
ISI
| PUBMED
28. Johnson CA, Samuels SJ. Screening for glaucomatous visual field loss with frequency-doubling
perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1997;38:413-425.
FREE FULL TEXT
29. Perry VH, Oehler R, Cowey A. Retinal ganglion cells that project to the dorsal lateral geniculate
nucleus in the macaque monkey. Neuroscience. 1984;12:1101-1123.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
30. Shapley R, Perry VH. Cat and monkey retinal ganglion cells and their visual functional roles. Trends Neurosci. 1986;9:229-235.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
31. Johnson CA. Selective versus nonselective losses in glaucoma. J Glaucoma. 1994;3(suppl):S32-S44.
32. Johnson CA, Adams AJ, Casson EJ, Brandt JD. Progression of early glaucomatous visual field loss as detected by
blue-on-yellow and standard white-on-white automated perimetry. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993;111:651-656.
FREE FULL TEXT
33. Sample PA, Weinreb RN. Color perimetry for assessment of primary open-angle glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1990;31:1869-1875.
FREE FULL TEXT
34. Greenstein VC, Hood DC, Ritch R, Steinberger D, Carr RE. S (blue) cone pathway vulnerability in retinitis pigmentosa, diabetes
and glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1989;30:1732-1737.
FREE FULL TEXT
35. Greenstein VC, Sarter B, Hood DC, Noble K, Carr RE. Hue discrimination and S cone pathway sensitivity in early diabetic
retinopathy. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1990;31:1008-1014.
FREE FULL TEXT
36. Greenstein VC, Shapiro A, Hood DC, Zaidi Q. Chromatic and luminance sensitivity in diabetes and glaucoma. J Opt Soc Am A. 1993;10:1785-1791.
ISI
| PUBMED
37. Terasaki H, Hirose H, Miyake Y. S-cone pathway sensitivity in diabetes measured with threshold versus
intensity curves on flashed backgrounds. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1996;37:680-684.
FREE FULL TEXT
38. Remky A, Arend O, Hendricks S. Short-wavelength automated perimetry and capillary density in early
diabetic maculopathy. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:274-281.
FREE FULL TEXT
39. Swanson WH, Birch DG, Anderson JL. S-cone function in patients with retinitis pigmentosa. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1993;34:3045-3055.
FREE FULL TEXT
40. Ham WT. Action spectrum for retinal injury from near UV radiation in the aphakic
monkey. Am J Ophthalmol. 1982;93:299-306.
ISI
| PUBMED
41. Greenstein VC, Shapiro A, Zaidi Q, Hood DC. Psychophysical evidence for post-receptoral sensitivity loss in diabetics. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1992;33:2781-2790.
FREE FULL TEXT
42. Sample PA, Taylor JDN, Martinez G, Lusky M, Weinreb RN. Short-wavelength color visual fields in glaucoma suspects at risk. Am J Ophthalmol. 1993;115:225-233.
ISI
| PUBMED
43. Johnson CA, Adams AJ, Casson EJ, Brandt JD. Blue-on-yellow perimetry can predict the development of glaucomatous
visual field loss. Arch Ophthalmol. 1993;111:645-650.
FREE FULL TEXT
44. Sample PA, Weinreb RN. Progressive color visual field loss in eyes with primary open angle
glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1992;33:2068-2071.
FREE FULL TEXT
45. Wyszecki G, Stiles WS. Color Science: Concepts and Methods, Quantitative
Data and Formulae. 2nd ed. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 1982.
46. Headache Classification Committee of the International Headache Society. Classification and diagnostic criteria for headache disorders, cranial
neuralgias and facial pain. Cephalalgia. 1988;8 Suppl 7:1-96.
47. Sample PA, Johnson CA, Haegerstrom-Portnoy G, Adams AJ. Optimal parameters for short-wavelength automated perimetry. J Glaucoma. 1996;5:375-383.
ISI
| PUBMED
48. Pryse-Phillips W, Findlay H, Tugwell P, Edmeads J, Murray TJ, Nelson RE. A Canadian population survey on the clinical, epidemiological and societal
impact of migraine and tension-type headache. Can J Neurol Sci. 1992;19:333-339.
ISI
| PUBMED
49. Gobel H, Perterson-Braun M, Soyka D. The epidemiology of headache in Germany: a nationwide survey of a representative
sample on the basis of headache classification of the International Headache
Society. Cephalalgia. 1994;14:97-106.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
50. Russell MB, Rasmussen BK, Thorvaldsen P, Olesen J. Prevalence and sex-ratio of the subtypes of migraine. Int J Epidemiol. 1995;24:612-618.
FREE FULL TEXT
51. Stewart W, Lipton R, Celentano D, Reed M. Prevalence of migraine headache in the United States: relation to age,
income, race and other sociodemographic factors. JAMA. 1992;267:64-69.
FREE FULL TEXT
52. Sankoh AJ, Huque MF, Dubey SD. Some comments on frequently used multiple endpoint adjustment methods
in clinical trials. Stat Med. 1997;16:2529-2542.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
53. Hochberg Y. A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of signficance. Biometrika. 1988;75:800-802.
FREE FULL TEXT
54. Graham RL, Knuth DE, Patashnik O. Concrete Mathematics: Foundation for Computer Science. New York, NY: Addison-Wesley Longman Inc; 1989.
55. Demirel S, Johnson CA. Isolation of short-wavelength sensitive mechanisms in normal and glaucomatous
visual field regions. J Glaucoma. 2000;9:63-73.
ISI
| PUBMED
56. Barlow HB. Increment thresholds at low intensities considered as signal/noise
discrimination. J Physiol. 1936;136:469-488.
57. Kalloniatis M, Harwerth R. Spectral sensitivity and adaptation characteristics of cone mechanisms
under white-light adaptation. J Opt Soc Am A. 1990;7:1912-1928.
ISI
| PUBMED
58. Wray SH, Mijovic-Prelec D, Kosslyn SM. Visual processing in migraineurs. Brain. 1995;118:25-35.
FREE FULL TEXT
59. Wilkins AJ, Nimmo-Smith I, Tait A, et al. A neurological basis for visual discomfort. Brain. 1984;107(pt 4):989-1017.
60. Chronicle EP, Wilkins AJ, Coleston DM. Thresholds for detection of a target against a background grating suggest
visual dysfunction in migraine with aura but not migraine without aura. Cephalalgia. 1995;15:117-122.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
61. O'Brien C, Butt Z. Blood flow velocity in the peripheral circulation of glaucoma patients. Ophthalmologica. 1999;213:150-153.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
62. Hegyalijai T, Meienberg O, Dubler B, Gasser P. Cold-induced acral vasospasm in migraine as assessed by nailfold video-microscopy:
prevalence and response to migraine prophylaxis. Angiology. 1997;48:345-349.
63. Bednarczyk EM, Remler B, Wiekart C, Nelson AD, Reed RC. Global cerebral blood flow, blood volume, and oxygen metabolism in
patients with migraine headache. Neurology. 1998;50:1736-1740.
FREE FULL TEXT
64. Welch KMA, Cao Y, Aurora S, Wiggins G, Vikingstad EM. MRI of the occipital cortex, red nucleus, and substantia nigra during
visual aura of migraine. Neurology. 1998;51:1465-1469.
FREE FULL TEXT
65. Vingrys AJ, Demirel S, Kalloniatis M. Multi-dimensional colour, flicker and increment perimetry. In: Mills, RP, ed. Perimetry Update 93/94.
Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Kugler; 1994:159-166.
66. Wild JM, Moss ID, Whitaker D, O'Neill EC. The statistical interpretation of blue-on-yellow visual field loss. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1995;36:1398-1410.
FREE FULL TEXT
67. Wild JM, Cubbidge RP, Pacey IE, Robinson R. Statistical aspects of the normal visual field in short-wavelength
automated perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1998;39:54-63.
FREE FULL TEXT
68. Nelson-Quigg JM, Johnson CA, Casson EJ, Adams AJ. Long- and short term variability for perimetry of short wavelength
sensitive (SWS) mechanisms [ARVO abstract]. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1990;31:S190.
69. Mitchell P, Smith W, Attebo K, Healey PR. Prevalence of open-angle glaucoma in Australia: the Blue Mountains
Eye Study. Ophthalmology. 1996;103:1661-1669.
ISI
| PUBMED
70. Tielsch JM, Sommer A, Katz J, Royall RM, Quigley HA, Javitt J. Racial variations in the prevalence of primary open-angle glaucoma:
the Baltimore Eye Survey. JAMA. 1991;266:369-374.
FREE FULL TEXT
71. Pradalier A, Hamard P, Sellem E, Bringer L. Migraine and glaucoma: an epidemiologic survey of French ophthalmologists. Cephalalgia. 1998;18:74-76.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
Archives of Ophthalmology Reader's Choice: Continuing Medical Education
Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120(2):243.
FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
Orientation Discrimination and Contrast Detection Thresholds in Migraine for Cardinal and Oblique Angles
Tibber et al.
IOVS 2006;47:5599-5604.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Transient Tritanopia in Migraine: Evidence for a Large-Field Retinal Abnormality in Blue-Yellow Opponent Pathways
Tibber and Shepherd
IOVS 2006;47:5125-5131.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Decreased Visual Field Sensitivity Measured 1 Day, Then 1 Week, after Migraine
McKendrick and Badcock
IOVS 2004;45:1061-1070.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Contrast-Processing Dysfunction in both Magnocellular and Parvocellular Pathways in Migraineurs with or without Aura
McKendrick and Badcock
IOVS 2003;44:442-448.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
