Quantification of the Visual Field Loss in Retinitis Pigmentosa Using Semi-Automated Kinetic Perimetry

References

• Berson EL, Sandberg MA, Rosner B, Birch DG, Hanson AH. Natural course of retinitis pigmentosa over a three-year interval. Am J Ophthalmol 1985;99:240–251.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grover S, Fishman GA, Anderson RJ, Alexander KR, Derlacki DJ. Rate of visual field loss in retinitis pigmentosa. Ophthalmology 1997;104:460–465.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gonin J. Le scotome annulaire dans la degenerescence pigmentaire de la retine. Ann d’Ocul 1901;125:101–130.
   Google Scholar
• Goldmann H. Grundlagen exakter Perimetrie. Ophthalmologica 1945;109:57–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee SH, Yu HG, Seo JM, Moon SW, Moon JW, Kim SJ, Chung H. Hereditary and clinical features of retinitis pigmentosa in Koreans. J Korean Med Sci 2010;25:918–923.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iannaccone A, Kritchevsky SB, Ciccarelli ML, Tedesco SA, Macaluso C, Kimberling WJ, Somes GW. Kinetics of visual field loss in Usher syndrome Type II. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2004;45:784–792.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bittner AK, Iftikhar MH, Dagnelie G. Test-retest, within-visit variability of Goldmann visual fields in retinitis pigmentosa. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2011;52:8042–8046.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schiefer U, Schiller J, Paetzold J, Dietrich TJ, Vonthein R, Besch D. Evaluation of extensive visual field defects with computer-assisted kinetic perimetry. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 2001;218:13–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nowomiejska K, Vonthein R, Paetzold J, Zagorski Z, Kardon R, Schiefer U. Comparison between semi-automated kinetic perimetry (SKP) and conventional Goldmann manual kinetic perimetry (MKP) in patients with advanced visual field loss. Ophthalmology 2005;112:1343–1354.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson CA, Keltner JL. Optimal rates of movement for kinetic perimetry. Arch Ophthalmol 1987;105:73–75.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wabbels BK, Kolling G. Automatische kinetische Perimetrie mit unterschiedlichen Prüfgeschwindigkeiten. Ophthalmologe 2001;98:168–173.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lachenmayr BJ, Vivell PMO. Perimetrie. Stuttgart: Thieme; 1992.
   Google Scholar
• Nowomiejska K, Vonthein R, Paetzold J, Zagorski Z, Kardon R, Schiefer U. Reaction time during semi-automated kinetic perimetry (SKP) in patients with advanced visual field loss. Acta Ophthalmol 2010;88:65–69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nowomiejska K, Rejdak R, Zagorski Z, Zarnowski T. Comparison of static automated perimetry and semi-automated kinetic perimetry in patients with bilateral visible optic nerve head drusen. Acta Ophthalmol 2009;87:801–805.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nowomiejska K, Brzozowska A, Zarnowski T, Rejdak R, Weleber RG, Schiefer U. Variability in isopter position and fatigue during semi-automated kinetic perimetry. Ophthalmologica 2012;227:166–172.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nowomiejska K, Jedrych M, Brzozowska A, Rejdak K, Zarnowski T, Koss MJ, et al. Relationship between the area of isopters and Vigabatrin dosage during two years of observation. BMC Ophthalmol 2014;30:14–56.
   Google Scholar
• Grover S, Fishman GA, Brown J Jr. Patterns of visual field progression in patients with retinitis pigmentosa. Ophthalmology 1998;105:1069–1075.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nowomiejska K, Paetzold J, Krapp E, Rejdak R, Zarnowski T, Zagórski Z, Schiefer U. Applicability of semi-automated kinetic perimetry (SKP) in the assessment of the visual field loss due to retinitis pigmentosa. Klin Oczna 2004;106:500–502.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Seiple W, Clemens CJ, Greenstein VC, Carr RE, Holopigian K. Test–retest reliability of the multifocal electroretinogram and humphrey visual fields in patients with retinitis pigmentosa. Doc Ophthalmol. 2004;109:255–272.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim LS, McAnany JJ, Alexander KR, Fishman GA. Intersession repeatability of Humphrey perimetry measurements in patients with retinitis pigmentosa. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2007;48:4720–4724.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rangaswamy NV, Patel HM, Locke KG, Hood DC, Birch DG. A comparison of visual field sensitivity to photoreceptor thickness in retinitis pigmentosa. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2010;51:4213–4219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross DF, Fishman GA, Gilbert LD, Anderson RJ. Variability of visual field measurements in normal subjects and patients with retinitis pigmentosa. Arch Ophthalmol 1984;102:1004–1010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nowomiejska K, Brzozowska A, Zarnowski T, Rejdak R, Weleber RG, Schiefer U. Variability in isopter position and fatigue during semi-automated kinetic perimetry. Ophthalmologica 2012;227:166–172.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berson EL, Rosner B, Weigel-DiFranco C, Dryja TP, Sandberg MA. Disease progression in patients with dominant retinitis pigmentosa and rhodopsin mutations. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2002;43:3027–3036.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holopigian K, Greenstein V, Seiple W, Carr R. Rates of change differ among measures of visual function in patients with retinitis pigmentosa. Ophthalmology 1996;103:398–405.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akeo K, Saga M, Hiida Y, Oguchi Y, Okisaka S. Progression of visual field loss in patients with retinitis pigmentosa of sporadic and autosomal recessive types. Ophthalmic Res 1998;30:11–22.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Massof, RW, Finkelstein D, Starr SJ, Kenyon KR, Fleischman JA, Maumenee H. Bilateral symmetry of vision disorders in typical retinitis pigmentosa. Br J Ophthalmol 1979;63:90–96.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishman GA, Bozbeyoglu S, Massof R, Kimberling W. Natural course of visual field loss in patients with type 2 Usher syndrome. Retina 2007;27:601–608.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wall M, Kutzko KE, Chauhan BC. Variability in patients with glaucomatous visual field damage is reduced using size V stimuli. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1997;38:426–435.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar