{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02457865168539326, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009129213483146067, 'mean_word_length': 5.753554502369668, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Application of automated perimetry in diagnosis of macular diseases].

PURPOSE
Evaluation of automated perimetry application in diagnosis of macular diseases.


MATERIAL AND METHODS
Examinations were performed in 27 patients with central chorioretinopathy (CSCR), 29 patients with diabetic maculopathy, 12 patients with drusen, 13 patients with macular hole, 55 patients with age-related macular degeneration (AMD) and 23 healthy volunteers. Central visual fields were tested with automated threshold-measuring perimetry using the LED-PERS perimeter. Localisation, depth and spread of defect in central visual field were estimated. All threshold values, mean sensitivity, fixation, fluctuation and visual acuity were calculated. Statistical comparison of examined parameters and multidimensional analysis of variance (MANOVA) was performed using software.


RESULTS
Significant differences were found when comparing all threshold values, mean sensitivity, fixation and fluctuation between the control and the other groups, and between patients with CSCR, with drusen and with AMD. Good results of MANOVA were obtained in 3 distinguishable classes between patients with CSCR, diabetic maculopathy and AMD. Positive correlation between threshold values of fields and visual acuity was noticed.


CONCLUSIONS
Automated perimetry has been confirmed to be very useful in differential diagnosis of patients with macular diseases.