Relationship between HEP perimetry and standard automated perimetry

Abstract Purpose To evaluate the relationship between Standard Automated Perimetry (SAP) performed with Humphrey perimeter (Carl Zeiss Meditec, EEUU) and a new white‐white perimetry tested with Heidelberg Edge Perimeter (HEP, Heidelberg Engineering, Alemania). Methods Fourty‐three subjects (healthy and with different levels of glaucomatous damage subjects) were prospectively and consecutively selected. Only one eye per subject was included in the study. All of them underwent at least one reliable perimetry with each device. 24‐2 SITA standard was used with Humphrey perimeter and 24‐2 ASTA standard algorithm was tested with HEP in all subjects. After checking the normal values of variables by Kolmogorov‐Smirnov test, Pearson’s correlation coefficients were calculated between global indices of both devices: mean deviation (MD), pattern standard deviation (PSD) and visual field index (VFI). Results Mean age was of 58.41±12.4 years. Subjects had mean IOP values of 18.24±3.6 mmHg. No differences were found in mean MD values (p=0.127): ‐2.82±4.8 dB and ‐1.54±2.6 dB between Humphrey and HEP, respectively. No differences were found in mean PSD values (p=0.290) between Humphrey (3.11±3.1) and HEP (2.52±1.9). The strongest correlations were observed between PSDs (0.788; p<0.001) and between PSD with HEP and VFI (‐0.711; p<0.001). Conclusion Both perimetries showed a good correlation between their indices. HEP tends to present MD and PSD values lower than Humphrey. Further studies are required to assess the clinical usefulness of HEP.