Abstract
We investigated the ability of preferential hyperacuity perimeter (PHP) and Amsler grid testing to detect metamorphosia in patients with macular hole (MH), central serous retinopathy (CSR), epiretinal membranes (EM), intermediate AMD (iAMD), classic and occult choroidal neovascularization (CNV) due to AMD, and compared the results. A total of 147 patients (n =153 eyes) with classic (35 eyes) and ...
Abstract
We investigated the ability of preferential hyperacuity perimeter (PHP) and Amsler grid testing to detect metamorphosia in patients with macular hole (MH), central serous retinopathy (CSR), epiretinal membranes (EM), intermediate AMD (iAMD), classic and occult choroidal neovascularization (CNV) due to AMD, and compared the results. A total of 147 patients (n =153 eyes) with classic (35 eyes) and occult (38 eyes) CNV, iAMD (13 eyes), MF (23 eyes), RCS (11 eyes), EM (13 eyes) and control group (20 eyes) were involved. All of these patients underwent corrected visual acuity and eye examinations inclusive of the Amsler grid. The PHP test was performed after pupil dilation. In all patients, fundus photography and optical coherence tomography (OCT) (Humphrey/Zeiss OCT III) were performed. In patients with CNV and CSR a fluorescein angiography was also performed. Metamorphopsia detection rates by Amsler grid and PHP were compared statistically. The sensitivity of PHP vs Amsler grid in detecting metamorphosia was 69% vs 85% in patients with MH, for CSR 64% vs 73%, EM 77% vs 100%, iAMD 85% vs 100%, classic CNV 83% vs 94% and occult CNV 81% vs 71%. The results for patients with occult CNV were significant (P=0.046), using the chi(2)-test. The PHP-test showed high sensitivity for diagnosing CNV. In occult CNV, PHP was superior to the Amsler grid in detecting metamorphopsia. In the other diseases involving the macular (MH, EM, CSR, iAMD), the detection rate and sensitivity of the Amsler grid was superior to PHP.
Altmetric