Automatic Computerized Perimetry in Neuro-Ophthalmology

Abstract

115 eyes of 63 patients with neurological diseases were examined with an automatic computerized perimeter. Manual kinetic perimetry with Goldmann’s instrument was used for comparison. In 92 fields the automatic method disclosed all defects that had been found by manual perimetry. Furthermore, in 8 fields it revealed small defects that had been missed at the initial manual examination. The remaining 15 fields were normal using both methods. In 22 pathological fields of 12 patients both examinations were repeated during the course of the disease and showed parallel improvement, deterioration or unchanged defects. It was concluded that the automatic method is superior to manual kinetic perimetry in detecting visual field defects of neurological origin, and that it may replace the manual method in following up small and medium-sized defects. For large defects it is not suitable.