Normal Values for Microperimetry with the MAIA Microperimeter: Sensitivity and Fixation Analysis in Healthy Adults and Children

Abstract

Purpose

To establish normative values of retinal sensitivity and parameters describing the fixation pattern using macular analyzer integrity assessment (MAIA) microperimetry (Centervue, Padova, Italy) in adults and children.

Methods

A sample of 237 eyes of 237 healthy subjects aged between 10 and 70 years (mean age 30.63 ± 16.23 years) was evaluated using the MAIA microperimeter. The following parameters provided by the MAIA device were evaluated: average threshold (AT), macular integrity, fixation indexes (P1% and P2%), bivariate contour ellipse area (BCEA) for 95% and 63% of points, and horizontal (H) and vertical (V) axes of the ellipse of fixation. Differences between different age-related groups were evaluated. Correlation of microperimetric parameters with age was also assessed.

Results

Median retinal sensitivity of the overall sample was 32.90 dB (interquartile range 1.80 dB). Median P1 and P2 values were 98.00% (6.00) and 100.00% (1.00), respectively. Median BCEA for 95% and 63% of points were 2.40°² (4.50) and 0.30°² (0.50), respectively. Median H and V were 0.90° (0.80) and 0.90° (0.70), respectively. Age was significantly correlated with the following parameters in subjects from 21 to 70 years of age (p<0.01): AT (rho -0.47), P1 (rho -0.37), BCEA95 (rho 0.43), BCEA63 (rho 0.42), H (rho 0.43), and V (rho 0.40).

Conclusions

Retinal sensitivity in healthy eyes tends to decrease with age as well as the stability of the pattern of fixation. A normative database in terms of retinal sensitivity threshold and fixation performance can be established in this type of eyes.

Keywords

Eye fixation MAIA Microperimeter Microperimetry Retinal sensitivity Visual field

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Markowitz

Reyes

Microperimetry and clinical practice: an evidence-based review.

Can J Ophthalmol. 2013;48(5):350–357.

Rohrschneider

Bültmann

Springer

Use of fundus perimetry (microperimetry) to quantify macular sensitivity.

Prog Retin Eye Res. 2008;27(5):536–548.

Longhin

Convento

Pilotto

et al.

Static and dynamic retinal fixation stability in microperimetry.

Can J Ophthalmol. 2013;48(5):375–380.

Parodi

Triolo

Morales

et al.

MP1 and MAIA fundus perimetry in healthy subjects and patients affected by retinal dystrophies.

Retina. 2015;35(8):1662–1669.

Vingolo

Salvatore

Domanico

Spadea

Nebbioso

Visual rehabilitation in patients with myopic maculopathy: our experience.

Can J Ophthalmol. 2013;48(5):438–442.

Grenga

Trabucco

Meduri

Fragiotta

Vingolo

Microperimetric biofeedback in a patient with oculocutaneous albinism.

Can J Ophthalmol. 2013;48(5):e105–e107.

Verboschi

Domanico

Nebbioso

Corradetti

Zaccaria Scalinci

Vingolo

New trends in visual rehabilitation with MP-1 microperimeter biofeedback: optic neural dysfunction.

Funct Neurol. 2013;28(4):285–291.

Vujosevic

Smolek

Lebow

Notaroberto

Pallikaris

Casciano

Detection of macular function changes in early (AREDS 2) and intermediate (AREDS 3) age-related macular degeneration.

Ophthalmologica. 2011;225(3):155–160.

Tarita-Nistor

González

Markowitz

Steinbach

Fixation characteristics of patients with macular degeneration recorded with the mp-1 microperimeter.

Retina. 2008;28(1):125–133.

10.

Ayton

Guymer

Luu

Comparison between multifocal electroretinography and microperimetry in age-related macular degeneration.

Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014;55(10):6431–6439.

11.

Parravano

Oddone

Boccassini

et al.

Functional and structural assessment of lamellar macular holes.

Br J Ophthalmol. 2013;97(3):291–296.

12.

Chung

Yun

Kim

S-W

Huh

Retinal sensitivity assessed by microperimetry and corresponding retinal structure and thickness in resolved central serous chorioretinopathy.

Eye (Lond). 2014;28(10):1223–1230.

13.

Huang

Shi

Wang

Zhang

SS-M

Zhang

Use of microperimetry to compare macular light sensitivity in eyes with open-angle and angle-closure glaucoma.

Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2012;56(2):138–144.

14.

Sato

Hirooka

Baba

Tenkumo

Nitta

Shiraga

Correlation between the ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer thickness measured with cirrus HD-OCT and macular visual field sensitivity measured with microperimetry.

Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2013;54(4):3046–3051.

15.

Salvatore

Fishman

McAnany

Genead

Association of dark-adapted visual function with retinal structural changes in patients with Stargardt disease.

Retina. 2014;34(5):989–995.

16.

Lupo

Grenga

Vingolo

Fourier-domain optical coherence tomography and microperimetry findings in retinitis pigmentosa.

Am J Ophthalmol. 2011;151(1):106–111.

17.

Molina-Martín

Piñero

Pérez-Cambrodí

Decreased perifoveal sensitivity detected by microperimetry in patients using hydroxychloroquine and without visual field and fundoscopic anomalies.

J Ophthalmol. 2015;2015:437271.

18.

Finger

Charbel Issa

Fimmers

Holz

Rubin

Scholl

HPN

Reading performance is reduced by parafoveal scotomas in patients with macular telangiectasia type 2.

Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2009;50(3):1366–1370.

19.

Martínez-Costa

Victoria Ibañez

Murcia-Bello

et al.

Use of microperimetry to evaluate hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine retinal toxicity.

Can J Ophthalmol. 2013;48(5):400–405.

20.

Molina-Martín

Piñero

Pérez-Cambrodí

Reliability and intersession agreement of microperimetric and fixation measurements obtained with a new microperimeter in normal eyes.

Curr Eye Res. 2016;41(3):400–409.

21.

Denniss

Astle

Central perimetric sensitivity estimates are directly influenced by the fixation target.

Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2016;36(4):453–458.

22.

Supriya

Shwetha

Kiran Anupama

Kummelil Mathew

Berendschot

TTJM

Schouten

JSAG

et al.

Structural and function correlation of cone packing utilizing adaptive optics and microperimetry.

Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:968672.

23.

Rohrschneider

Becker

Schumacher

Fendrich

Völcker

Normal values for fundus perimetry with the scanning laser ophthalmoscope.

Am J Ophthalmol. 1998;126(1):52–58.

24.

Midena

Vujosevic

Cavarzeran

Group MS; Microperimetry Study Group.

Normal values for fundus perimetry with the microperimeter MP1. Ophthalmology. 2010;117(8):1571–1576, 1576.e1.

25.

Shah

Chalam

Values for macular perimetry using the MP-1 microperimeter in normal subjects.

Ophthalmic Res. 2009;41(1):9–13.

26.

Ismail

Sharanjeet-Kaur, Mutalib HA, Ngah NF.

Macular retinal sensitivity using MP-1 in healthy Malaysian subjects of different ages. J Opt. 2015;8(4):266–272.

27.

Gella

Nittala

Raman

Retinal sensitivity in healthy Indians using microperimeter.

Indian J Ophthalmol. 2014;62(3):284–286.

28.

Zhou

Liu

Hao

Wang

X-L

[Macular retinal function detected by MP-1 microperimetry in normal subjects of middle and old age].

Zhonghua Yan Ke Za Zhi. 2011;47(1):35–38.

29.

Sabates

Vincent

Koulen

Sabates

Gallimore

Normative data set identifying properties of the macula across age groups: integration of visual function and retinal structure with microperimetry and spectral-domain optical coherence tomography.

Retina. 2011;31(7):1294–1302.

30.

Anastasakis

McAnany

Fishman

Seiple

Clinical value, normative retinal sensitivity values, and intrasession repeatability using a combined spectral domain optical coherence tomography/scanning laser ophthalmoscope microperimeter.

Eye (Lond). 2011;25(2):245–251.

31.

Cesareo

Manca

Ciuffoletti

et al.

Evaluation of fixation stability using different targets with the MP1 microperimeter.

Int Ophthalmol. 2015;35(1):11–17.

32.

Tse

Sheinberg

Logothetis

Fixational eye movements are not affected by abrupt onsets that capture attention.

Vision Res. 2002;42(13):1663–1669.

33.

Molina

Pérez-Cambrodí

Ruiz-Fortes

Laria

Piñero

Utility of microperimetry in nystagmus: a case report.

Can J Ophthalmol. 2013;48(5):e103–e105.

34.

Molina-Martín

Piñero

Pérez-Cambrodí

Fixation pattern analysis with microperimetry in nystagmus patients.

Can J Ophthalmol. 2015;50(6):413–421.

35.

Boon

Suttle

Henry

Dain

Dynamics of chromatic visual system processing differ in complexity between children and adults.

J Vis. 2009;9(6):22.1–17.

36.

Conner

Sharma

Lemieux

Mendola

Retinotopic organization in children measured with fMRI.

J Vis. 2004;4(6):509–523.

37.

Giedd

Structural magnetic resonance imaging of the adolescent brain.

Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2004;1021(1):77–85.