Pablo Galarza, Elhanan Parnasa, Noah Guttmann, Joshua M Kruger
{"title":"在神经眼科实践中，在技术上“可靠”的视野研究中确定的人工视野缺陷。","authors":"Pablo Galarza, Elhanan Parnasa, Noah Guttmann, Joshua M Kruger","doi":"10.2147/EB.S274523","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess the reliability of automated visual field studies with neurological abnormalities and normal reliability indices that were inconsistent with the remainder of the neuro-ophthalmic assessment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective observational study from the clinical practice of a neuro-ophthalmologist at a tertiary referral center.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 2230 patient charts, ten cases were identified that met the inclusion criteria. In eight of the cases repeat visual field testing had no reproducible abnormality. Four of these cases were concerning for a bitemporal or homonymous hemianopia. None of the patients, including the two cases with a reproducible defect, developed any convincing manifestations of an organic disease related to the visual field defect.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings suggest that even marked neurological abnormalities on reliable automated visual field tests can be false. When the remainder of the neuro-ophthalmic evaluation is inconsistent with the test result, we recommend that clinicians attempt to immediately repeat the visual field study.</p>","PeriodicalId":51844,"journal":{"name":"Eye and Brain","volume":"13 ","pages":"79-88"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/74/a8/eb-13-79.PMC8054576.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Artifactual Visual Field Defects Identified on Technically \\\"Reliable\\\" Visual Field Studies in a Neuro-Ophthalmology Practice.\",\"authors\":\"Pablo Galarza, Elhanan Parnasa, Noah Guttmann, Joshua M Kruger\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/EB.S274523\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess the reliability of automated visual field studies with neurological abnormalities and normal reliability indices that were inconsistent with the remainder of the neuro-ophthalmic assessment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective observational study from the clinical practice of a neuro-ophthalmologist at a tertiary referral center.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 2230 patient charts, ten cases were identified that met the inclusion criteria. In eight of the cases repeat visual field testing had no reproducible abnormality. Four of these cases were concerning for a bitemporal or homonymous hemianopia. None of the patients, including the two cases with a reproducible defect, developed any convincing manifestations of an organic disease related to the visual field defect.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings suggest that even marked neurological abnormalities on reliable automated visual field tests can be false. When the remainder of the neuro-ophthalmic evaluation is inconsistent with the test result, we recommend that clinicians attempt to immediately repeat the visual field study.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51844,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Eye and Brain\",\"volume\":\"13 \",\"pages\":\"79-88\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/74/a8/eb-13-79.PMC8054576.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Eye and Brain\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/EB.S274523\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eye and Brain","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/EB.S274523","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Artifactual Visual Field Defects Identified on Technically "Reliable" Visual Field Studies in a Neuro-Ophthalmology Practice.
Purpose: To assess the reliability of automated visual field studies with neurological abnormalities and normal reliability indices that were inconsistent with the remainder of the neuro-ophthalmic assessment.
Methods: Retrospective observational study from the clinical practice of a neuro-ophthalmologist at a tertiary referral center.
Results: From 2230 patient charts, ten cases were identified that met the inclusion criteria. In eight of the cases repeat visual field testing had no reproducible abnormality. Four of these cases were concerning for a bitemporal or homonymous hemianopia. None of the patients, including the two cases with a reproducible defect, developed any convincing manifestations of an organic disease related to the visual field defect.
Conclusion: Our findings suggest that even marked neurological abnormalities on reliable automated visual field tests can be false. When the remainder of the neuro-ophthalmic evaluation is inconsistent with the test result, we recommend that clinicians attempt to immediately repeat the visual field study.
期刊介绍：
Eye and Brain is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal focusing on basic research, clinical findings, and expert reviews in the field of visual science and neuro-ophthalmology. The journal’s unique focus is the link between two well-known visual centres, the eye and the brain, with an emphasis on the importance of such connections. All aspects of clinical and especially basic research on the visual system are addressed within the journal as well as significant future directions in vision research and therapeutic measures. This unique journal focuses on neurological aspects of vision – both physiological and pathological. The scope of the journal spans from the cornea to the associational visual cortex and all the visual centers in between. Topics range from basic biological mechanisms to therapeutic treatment, from simple organisms to humans, and utilizing techniques from molecular biology to behavior. The journal especially welcomes primary research articles or review papers that make the connection between the eye and the brain. Specific areas covered in the journal include: Physiology and pathophysiology of visual centers, Eye movement disorders and strabismus, Cellular, biochemical, and molecular features of the visual system, Structural and functional organization of the eye and of the visual cortex, Metabolic demands of the visual system, Diseases and disorders with neuro-ophthalmic manifestations, Clinical and experimental neuro-ophthalmology and visual system pathologies, Epidemiological studies.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
