Volume 93, Issue S255
ABS15-0408
Free Access

Frequency-Doubling Perimetry in Type2 Diabetes without Retinopathy

S. Aldaham

S. Aldaham

Applied Vision Research group-Faculty of Optics and Optometry, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain

Search for more papers by this author
M.D.C. Martín-Ridura

M.D.C. Martín-Ridura

Madrid City Hall, Diabetes Unit-Health Promotion and Prevention Services, Madrid, Spain

Search for more papers by this author
M.J. Pérez-Carrasco

M.J. Pérez-Carrasco

Applied Vision Research group-Faculty of Optics and Optometry, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain

Search for more papers by this author
C. Palomo-Álvarez

C. Palomo-Álvarez

Applied Vision Research group-Faculty of Optics and Optometry, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain

Search for more papers by this author
J. Carballo-Álvarez

J. Carballo-Álvarez

Applied Vision Research group-Faculty of Optics and Optometry, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain

Search for more papers by this author
M. Puell

M. Puell

Applied Vision Research group-Faculty of Optics and Optometry, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 23 September 2015

Abstract

Purpose

Frequency Doubling Technology (FDT) perimetry has been utilized to detect visual field (VF) changes in type 1 diabetics with no retinopathy. However, it has not been tested in type 2 diabetes. The purpose was to assess FDT perimetry and its diagnostic capacity in type 2 diabetics without retinopathy.

Methods

This comparative cross-sectional study included thirty-one controls and nineteen age-matched patients with type 2 diabetes without retinopathy, well controlled glucose level and onset duration >4 years. Full threshold C-20 program was used for VF testing in the FDT perimeter. Mean sensitivities for each VF location, mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD), and test duration were compared. Area under the curve (AUC) of a Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) was calculated to assess the diagnostic value of the FDT perimetry.

Results

Mean sensitivities for some VF locations were significantly lower in the diabetic group. The mean MD was worse in diabetics (−3.35 ± 2.02 dB) than controls (−1.95 ± 1.70 dB) (p < 0.05). Neither the mean PSD nor the testing time was significantly different between the two groups. AUC values for MD and PSD were 0.29 and 0.69, respectively, (standard error = 0.076, p = 0.024).

Conclusions

FDT perimetry has a diagnostic capacity as a clinical tool for the detection of early retinal dysfunction in Type 2 diabetics before the onset of retinopathy.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.