Table 1 Comparison of methods for early detection of CNV
From: Early detection of age related macular degeneration: current status
Method | Central visual field evaluated | Description of method | Pros | Cons |
|---|---|---|---|---|
OCT | NA | High resolution cross-sectional imaging of the retina | Sensitivity for detection of intra- and sub-retinal fluid in small quantities | Not yet portable, necessitating clinic visits |
Amsler grid | 20° | A chart consisting of a 10 cm square with a grid and a central spot for fixation | Readily available Convenient to use | Variable sensitivity |
Near visual acuity | NA | Near vision chart | Readily available Convenient to use | Sensitivity and specificity were not studied |
Preferential hyperacuity perimetry (PHP) home device | 14° | Quantification of perceived distortions by the patient | Smaller decline in visual acuity compared to standard care | Cost |
Shape-discrimination hyperacuity (SDH) smartphone application | NA | Shape discrimination tasks testing a patient’s ability to detect visual distortion | Convenient to use May differentiate between advanced and intermediate AMD | Large scale studies still underway at the time of this writing |
Macular mapping test (MMT) | 18° | Tests residual function while providing a quantitative score, allowing for monitoring of disease progression | May be useful to monitor progression of AMD | Not readily available No large scale studies |
Noisefield perimetry | NA | Flickering dots are shown at high frequency. Patients report abnormalities in background noisefield | Relatively high sensitivity and specificity for detection of AMD, more at advanced stages | Not readily available No large scale studies |