Does the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) accurately map visual field loss attributed to vigabatrin?

Vigabatrin (VGB) is an anti-epileptic medication which has been linked to peripheral constriction of the visual field. Documenting the natural history associated with continued VGB exposure is important when making decisions about the risk and benefits associated with the treatment. Due to its speed...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMC ophthalmology 2014-12, Vol.14 (1), p.166-166, Article 166
Hauptverfasser: Conway, Miriam L, Hosking, Sarah L, Zhu, Haogang, Cubbidge, Robert P
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 166
container_issue 1
container_start_page 166
container_title BMC ophthalmology
container_volume 14
creator Conway, Miriam L
Hosking, Sarah L
Zhu, Haogang
Cubbidge, Robert P
description Vigabatrin (VGB) is an anti-epileptic medication which has been linked to peripheral constriction of the visual field. Documenting the natural history associated with continued VGB exposure is important when making decisions about the risk and benefits associated with the treatment. Due to its speed the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) has become the algorithm of choice when carrying out Full Threshold automated static perimetry. SITA uses prior distributions of normal and glaucomatous visual field behaviour to estimate threshold sensitivity. As the abnormal model is based on glaucomatous behaviour this algorithm has not been validated for VGB recipients. We aim to assess the clinical utility of the SITA algorithm for accurately mapping VGB attributed field loss. The sample comprised one randomly selected eye of 16 patients diagnosed with epilepsy, exposed to VGB therapy. A clinical diagnosis of VGB attributed visual field loss was documented in 44% of the group. The mean age was 39.3 years ± 14.5 years and the mean deviation was -4.76 dB ±4.34 dB. Each patient was examined with the Full Threshold, SITA Standard and SITA Fast algorithm. SITA Standard was on average approximately twice as fast (7.6 minutes) and SITA Fast approximately 3 times as fast (4.7 minutes) as examinations completed using the Full Threshold algorithm (15.8 minutes). In the clinical environment, the visual field outcome with both SITA algorithms was equivalent to visual field examination using the Full Threshold algorithm in terms of visual inspection of the grey scale plots , defect area and defect severity. Our research shows that both SITA algorithms are able to accurately map visual field loss attributed to VGB. As patients diagnosed with epilepsy are often vulnerable to fatigue, the time saving offered by SITA Fast means that this algorithm has a significant advantage for use with VGB recipients.
doi_str_mv 10.1186/1471-2415-14-166
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4391113</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A539589830</galeid><sourcerecordid>A539589830</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c491t-b3a9e01b4727cb2bd7d54fa464e54be7d66494a2541aec1349b9bd6371346f513</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptUk1v1DAQjRAVLYU7J2SJSzmkjWPHTi6gVflaqVIPXc6WPyYbV0682M6i_nsctSwtqnzwaOa9N57xK4p3uDrHuGUXmHJc1hQ3JaYlZuxFcXJIvXwUHxevY7ytqrqipH1VHNdNQ7qGdSdF-OIhojQAuvkNxsYBracEQepk94A2Q4A4eGfQym19sGkY0dnNerP6iKTWc5AJ3B0a5Q7tbZylQ72FDHY-RiRTClbNCQxKPte3UsmcmT6_KY566SK8fbhPi5_fvm4uf5RX19_Xl6urUtMOp1IR2UGFFeU116pWhpuG9pIyCg1VwA1jtKOybiiWoDGhneqUYYTnkPUNJqfFp3vd3axGMBqmFKQTu2BHGe6El1Y8rUx2EFu_F5R0GGOSBc4eBIL_NUNMYrRRg3NyAj9HgRlnhLRdSzP0w3_QWz-HKY-XUQ3lbc149Q-1lQ6EnXqf--pFVKyWD8lSZEGdP4PKx8BotZ-gtzn_hFDdE3TIiw_QH2bElVh8IhYjiMUIOcoPYpny_vFuDoS_xiB_AOOCt6c</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1654782670</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Does the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) accurately map visual field loss attributed to vigabatrin?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</source><creator>Conway, Miriam L ; Hosking, Sarah L ; Zhu, Haogang ; Cubbidge, Robert P</creator><creatorcontrib>Conway, Miriam L ; Hosking, Sarah L ; Zhu, Haogang ; Cubbidge, Robert P</creatorcontrib><description>Vigabatrin (VGB) is an anti-epileptic medication which has been linked to peripheral constriction of the visual field. Documenting the natural history associated with continued VGB exposure is important when making decisions about the risk and benefits associated with the treatment. Due to its speed the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) has become the algorithm of choice when carrying out Full Threshold automated static perimetry. SITA uses prior distributions of normal and glaucomatous visual field behaviour to estimate threshold sensitivity. As the abnormal model is based on glaucomatous behaviour this algorithm has not been validated for VGB recipients. We aim to assess the clinical utility of the SITA algorithm for accurately mapping VGB attributed field loss. The sample comprised one randomly selected eye of 16 patients diagnosed with epilepsy, exposed to VGB therapy. A clinical diagnosis of VGB attributed visual field loss was documented in 44% of the group. The mean age was 39.3 years ± 14.5 years and the mean deviation was -4.76 dB ±4.34 dB. Each patient was examined with the Full Threshold, SITA Standard and SITA Fast algorithm. SITA Standard was on average approximately twice as fast (7.6 minutes) and SITA Fast approximately 3 times as fast (4.7 minutes) as examinations completed using the Full Threshold algorithm (15.8 minutes). In the clinical environment, the visual field outcome with both SITA algorithms was equivalent to visual field examination using the Full Threshold algorithm in terms of visual inspection of the grey scale plots , defect area and defect severity. Our research shows that both SITA algorithms are able to accurately map visual field loss attributed to VGB. As patients diagnosed with epilepsy are often vulnerable to fatigue, the time saving offered by SITA Fast means that this algorithm has a significant advantage for use with VGB recipients.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1471-2415</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-2415</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1186/1471-2415-14-166</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25539569</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: BioMed Central Ltd</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Algorithms ; Anticonvulsants - adverse effects ; Female ; Glaucoma - chemically induced ; Glaucoma - diagnosis ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Ophthalmology ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Sensory Thresholds - physiology ; Vigabatrin - adverse effects ; Vision Disorders - chemically induced ; Vision Disorders - diagnosis ; Visual Field Tests - methods ; Visual Fields ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>BMC ophthalmology, 2014-12, Vol.14 (1), p.166-166, Article 166</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2014 BioMed Central Ltd.</rights><rights>2014 Conway et al.; licensee BioMed Central. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.</rights><rights>Conway et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c491t-b3a9e01b4727cb2bd7d54fa464e54be7d66494a2541aec1349b9bd6371346f513</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c491t-b3a9e01b4727cb2bd7d54fa464e54be7d66494a2541aec1349b9bd6371346f513</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4391113/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4391113/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25539569$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Conway, Miriam L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hosking, Sarah L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhu, Haogang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cubbidge, Robert P</creatorcontrib><title>Does the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) accurately map visual field loss attributed to vigabatrin?</title><title>BMC ophthalmology</title><addtitle>BMC Ophthalmol</addtitle><description>Vigabatrin (VGB) is an anti-epileptic medication which has been linked to peripheral constriction of the visual field. Documenting the natural history associated with continued VGB exposure is important when making decisions about the risk and benefits associated with the treatment. Due to its speed the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) has become the algorithm of choice when carrying out Full Threshold automated static perimetry. SITA uses prior distributions of normal and glaucomatous visual field behaviour to estimate threshold sensitivity. As the abnormal model is based on glaucomatous behaviour this algorithm has not been validated for VGB recipients. We aim to assess the clinical utility of the SITA algorithm for accurately mapping VGB attributed field loss. The sample comprised one randomly selected eye of 16 patients diagnosed with epilepsy, exposed to VGB therapy. A clinical diagnosis of VGB attributed visual field loss was documented in 44% of the group. The mean age was 39.3 years ± 14.5 years and the mean deviation was -4.76 dB ±4.34 dB. Each patient was examined with the Full Threshold, SITA Standard and SITA Fast algorithm. SITA Standard was on average approximately twice as fast (7.6 minutes) and SITA Fast approximately 3 times as fast (4.7 minutes) as examinations completed using the Full Threshold algorithm (15.8 minutes). In the clinical environment, the visual field outcome with both SITA algorithms was equivalent to visual field examination using the Full Threshold algorithm in terms of visual inspection of the grey scale plots , defect area and defect severity. Our research shows that both SITA algorithms are able to accurately map visual field loss attributed to VGB. As patients diagnosed with epilepsy are often vulnerable to fatigue, the time saving offered by SITA Fast means that this algorithm has a significant advantage for use with VGB recipients.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Anticonvulsants - adverse effects</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Glaucoma - chemically induced</subject><subject>Glaucoma - diagnosis</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Ophthalmology</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Sensory Thresholds - physiology</subject><subject>Vigabatrin - adverse effects</subject><subject>Vision Disorders - chemically induced</subject><subject>Vision Disorders - diagnosis</subject><subject>Visual Field Tests - methods</subject><subject>Visual Fields</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>1471-2415</issn><issn>1471-2415</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNptUk1v1DAQjRAVLYU7J2SJSzmkjWPHTi6gVflaqVIPXc6WPyYbV0682M6i_nsctSwtqnzwaOa9N57xK4p3uDrHuGUXmHJc1hQ3JaYlZuxFcXJIvXwUHxevY7ytqrqipH1VHNdNQ7qGdSdF-OIhojQAuvkNxsYBracEQepk94A2Q4A4eGfQym19sGkY0dnNerP6iKTWc5AJ3B0a5Q7tbZylQ72FDHY-RiRTClbNCQxKPte3UsmcmT6_KY566SK8fbhPi5_fvm4uf5RX19_Xl6urUtMOp1IR2UGFFeU116pWhpuG9pIyCg1VwA1jtKOybiiWoDGhneqUYYTnkPUNJqfFp3vd3axGMBqmFKQTu2BHGe6El1Y8rUx2EFu_F5R0GGOSBc4eBIL_NUNMYrRRg3NyAj9HgRlnhLRdSzP0w3_QWz-HKY-XUQ3lbc149Q-1lQ6EnXqf--pFVKyWD8lSZEGdP4PKx8BotZ-gtzn_hFDdE3TIiw_QH2bElVh8IhYjiMUIOcoPYpny_vFuDoS_xiB_AOOCt6c</recordid><startdate>20141223</startdate><enddate>20141223</enddate><creator>Conway, Miriam L</creator><creator>Hosking, Sarah L</creator><creator>Zhu, Haogang</creator><creator>Cubbidge, Robert P</creator><general>BioMed Central Ltd</general><general>BioMed Central</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20141223</creationdate><title>Does the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) accurately map visual field loss attributed to vigabatrin?</title><author>Conway, Miriam L ; Hosking, Sarah L ; Zhu, Haogang ; Cubbidge, Robert P</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c491t-b3a9e01b4727cb2bd7d54fa464e54be7d66494a2541aec1349b9bd6371346f513</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Anticonvulsants - adverse effects</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Glaucoma - chemically induced</topic><topic>Glaucoma - diagnosis</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Ophthalmology</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Sensory Thresholds - physiology</topic><topic>Vigabatrin - adverse effects</topic><topic>Vision Disorders - chemically induced</topic><topic>Vision Disorders - diagnosis</topic><topic>Visual Field Tests - methods</topic><topic>Visual Fields</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Conway, Miriam L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hosking, Sarah L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhu, Haogang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cubbidge, Robert P</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>BMC ophthalmology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Conway, Miriam L</au><au>Hosking, Sarah L</au><au>Zhu, Haogang</au><au>Cubbidge, Robert P</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Does the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) accurately map visual field loss attributed to vigabatrin?</atitle><jtitle>BMC ophthalmology</jtitle><addtitle>BMC Ophthalmol</addtitle><date>2014-12-23</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>166</spage><epage>166</epage><pages>166-166</pages><artnum>166</artnum><issn>1471-2415</issn><eissn>1471-2415</eissn><abstract>Vigabatrin (VGB) is an anti-epileptic medication which has been linked to peripheral constriction of the visual field. Documenting the natural history associated with continued VGB exposure is important when making decisions about the risk and benefits associated with the treatment. Due to its speed the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) has become the algorithm of choice when carrying out Full Threshold automated static perimetry. SITA uses prior distributions of normal and glaucomatous visual field behaviour to estimate threshold sensitivity. As the abnormal model is based on glaucomatous behaviour this algorithm has not been validated for VGB recipients. We aim to assess the clinical utility of the SITA algorithm for accurately mapping VGB attributed field loss. The sample comprised one randomly selected eye of 16 patients diagnosed with epilepsy, exposed to VGB therapy. A clinical diagnosis of VGB attributed visual field loss was documented in 44% of the group. The mean age was 39.3 years ± 14.5 years and the mean deviation was -4.76 dB ±4.34 dB. Each patient was examined with the Full Threshold, SITA Standard and SITA Fast algorithm. SITA Standard was on average approximately twice as fast (7.6 minutes) and SITA Fast approximately 3 times as fast (4.7 minutes) as examinations completed using the Full Threshold algorithm (15.8 minutes). In the clinical environment, the visual field outcome with both SITA algorithms was equivalent to visual field examination using the Full Threshold algorithm in terms of visual inspection of the grey scale plots , defect area and defect severity. Our research shows that both SITA algorithms are able to accurately map visual field loss attributed to VGB. As patients diagnosed with epilepsy are often vulnerable to fatigue, the time saving offered by SITA Fast means that this algorithm has a significant advantage for use with VGB recipients.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>BioMed Central Ltd</pub><pmid>25539569</pmid><doi>10.1186/1471-2415-14-166</doi><tpages>1</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1471-2415
ispartof BMC ophthalmology, 2014-12, Vol.14 (1), p.166-166, Article 166
issn 1471-2415
1471-2415
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4391113
source MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central; PubMed Central Open Access; Springer Nature OA Free Journals
subjects Adolescent
Adult
Algorithms
Anticonvulsants - adverse effects
Female
Glaucoma - chemically induced
Glaucoma - diagnosis
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Ophthalmology
Sensitivity and Specificity
Sensory Thresholds - physiology
Vigabatrin - adverse effects
Vision Disorders - chemically induced
Vision Disorders - diagnosis
Visual Field Tests - methods
Visual Fields
Young Adult
title Does the Swedish Interactive Threshold Algorithm (SITA) accurately map visual field loss attributed to vigabatrin?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T14%3A19%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Does%20the%20Swedish%20Interactive%20Threshold%20Algorithm%20(SITA)%20accurately%20map%20visual%20field%20loss%20attributed%20to%20vigabatrin?&rft.jtitle=BMC%20ophthalmology&rft.au=Conway,%20Miriam%20L&rft.date=2014-12-23&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=166&rft.epage=166&rft.pages=166-166&rft.artnum=166&rft.issn=1471-2415&rft.eissn=1471-2415&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186/1471-2415-14-166&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA539589830%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1654782670&rft_id=info:pmid/25539569&rft_galeid=A539589830&rfr_iscdi=true