The Value of Static Perimetry in the Diagnosis and Follow-up of Negative Dysphotopsia

SIGNIFICANCE There is a clinical need for a quantitative test to objectively diagnose negative dysphotopsia, especially because the diagnosis is generally assessed using patients' subjective descriptions. In the search of a clinical test to objectify the shadow experienced in negative dysphotopsia, this study excludes static perimetry as suitable evaluation method. PURPOSE This study aimed to evaluate the value of static perimetry in the objective assessment and follow-up of negative dysphotopsia. METHODS Peripheral 60-4 full-threshold visual field tests were performed in 27 patients with negative dysphotopsia and 33 pseudophakic controls. In addition, 11 patients with negative dysphotopsia repeated the test after an intraocular lens exchange. Both the total peripheral visual field and the averaged peripheral visual field from 50 to 60° eccentricity were compared between patients and controls, and pre-operatively and post-operatively in patients who had an intraocular lens exchange. RESULTS The peripheral visual fields from 30 to 60° did not show significant differences between patients with negative dysphotopsia and pseudophakic controls. Analysis of the peripheral visual field from 50 to 60° showed a median [Q1, Q3] of 20.0 [17.1, 22.5] dB in the negative dysphotopsia group compared with 20.1 [15.5, 21.3] dB in the control group (P = .43). Although 82% of patients treated with an intraocular lens exchange subjectively reported improvement of their negative dysphotopsia complaints post-operatively, there were no significant differences in their total peripheral visual field or averaged peripheral visual field from 50 to 60° (P = .92). CONCLUSIONS Full-threshold static perimetry with a Goldmann size III stimulus up to 60° eccentricity does not show significant differences between patients with negative dysphotopsia and pseudophakic controls or between measurements before and after intraocular lens exchange. Therefore, this type of static perimetry cannot be used as a quantitative objective test for diagnosis or follow-up of patients with negative dysphotopsia.

[1]  A. Sadun,et al.  Benefit of Stimulus Size V Perimetry for Patients With a Dense Central Scotoma From Leber's Hereditary Optic Neuropathy , 2021, Translational vision science & technology.

[2]  B. Stoel,et al.  Evaluation of intraocular lens position and retinal shape in negative dysphotopsia using high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging , 2021, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[3]  J. Beenakker,et al.  Distinct differences in anterior chamber configuration and peripheral aberrations in negative dysphotopsia , 2020, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[4]  S. Masket,et al.  Binocular Goldmann visual field testing of negative dysphotopsia. , 2020, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[5]  A. Turpin,et al.  Threshold Automated Perimetry of the Full Visual Field in Patients With Glaucoma With Mild Visual Loss , 2019, Journal of glaucoma.

[6]  A. Turpin,et al.  Threshold Static Automated Perimetry of the Full Visual Field in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. , 2019, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[7]  T. Berendschot,et al.  Effect of active evaluation on the detection of negative dysphotopsia after sequential cataract surgery: discrepancy between incidences of unsolicited and solicited complaints , 2018, Acta ophthalmologica.

[8]  M. Simpson,et al.  Mini-review: Far peripheral vision , 2017, Vision Research.

[9]  B. Henderson,et al.  The Complexities of Negative Dysphotopsia. , 2017, Asia-Pacific journal of ophthalmology.

[10]  J. Holladay,et al.  Negative dysphotopsia: Causes and rationale for prevention and treatment. , 2017, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[11]  Mingguang He,et al.  Cataract Surgical Rate and Socioeconomics: A Global Study. , 2017, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[12]  T. Berendschot,et al.  Objective evaluation of negative dysphotopsia with Goldmann kinetic perimetry , 2016, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[13]  B. Henderson,et al.  Negative dysphotopsia: A perfect storm , 2015, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[14]  Bart Jaeken,et al.  Comparison of the optical image quality in the periphery of phakic and pseudophakic eyes. , 2013, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[15]  N. Jansonius,et al.  Influence of multifocal intraocular lenses on standard automated perimetry test results. , 2013, JAMA ophthalmology.

[16]  Krista I Kinard,et al.  Correlation of visual quality with satisfaction and function in a normal cohort of pseudophakic patients , 2013, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[17]  J. Holladay,et al.  Negative dysphotopsia: The enigmatic penumbra , 2012, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[18]  Michael Wall,et al.  Repeatability of automated perimetry: a comparison between standard automated perimetry with stimulus size III and V, matrix, and motion perimetry. , 2009, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[19]  R. Osher.  Negative dysphotopsia: Long‐term study and possible explanation for transient symptoms , 2008, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[20]  Chris A. Johnson,et al.  Total deviation probability plots for stimulus size v perimetry: a comparison with size III stimuli. , 2008, Archives of ophthalmology.

[21]  R. Sihota,et al.  Visual field assessment in glaucoma: comparative evaluation of manual kinetic Goldmann perimetry and automated static perimetry. , 2000, Indian journal of ophthalmology.

[22]  J. Davison.  Positive and negative dysphotopsia in patients with acrylic intraocular lenses , 2000, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[23]  J. Wild,et al.  Between-algorithm, between-individual differences in normal perimetric sensitivity: full threshold, FASTPAC, and SITA. Swedish Interactive Threshold algorithm. , 1999, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[24]  B. Bengtsson,et al.  Inter-subject variability and normal limits of the SITA Standard, SITA Fast, and the Humphrey Full Threshold computerized perimetry strategies, SITA STATPAC. , 1999, Acta ophthalmologica Scandinavica.

[25]  W. F. Harris,et al.  Mean visual acuity , 1992, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[26]  S. Masket,et al.  Surgical management of negative dysphotopsia. , 2018, Journal of cataract and refractive surgery.

[27]  C. Phelps,et al.  The normal visual field on the Humphrey field analyzer. , 1986, Ophthalmologica. Journal international d'ophtalmologie. International journal of ophthalmology. Zeitschrift fur Augenheilkunde.