[Update on glaucoma diagnosis and follow-up].
OBJECTIVE
To compare the different methods proposed for glaucoma diagnosis and follow-up.


METHODS
Review of those papers that have published the sensitivity and specificity of the different methods, as well as simultaneous comparative studies of several of these methods, especially those that used patients in the initial stages of the disease.


RESULTS
After analyzing the sensitivity and specificity results of the proposed techniques, we have found no evidence that blue-yellow perimetry (SWAP), nerve fibers photography, laser polarimetry (GDx), electrophysiological techniques or optic nerve head topography have better diagnosis abilities than white-white perimetry. This last technique evolves with the others, giving new criteria and strategies with higher precision. The different comparative results of the anatomical and functional procedures do not coincide and do not allow one to establish definite conclusions.


CONCLUSIONS
The most promising expectations are nowadays on temporal phenomena (FDT, Flicker, PULSAR), new methods for analyzing optic nerve topography results and the value of the loss variance (LV) on TOP perimetry. The worst results correspond to blue-yellow perimetry and GDx.
González de la Rosa
M A
MA
Servicio de Oftalmología, Hospital Universitario de Canarias, Universidad de La Laguna, Islas Canarias, España. mgdelarosa@jet.es
D003941:Diagnostic Techniques, Ophthalmological; D018450:Disease Progression; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D005901:Glaucoma / Q000175:diagnosis*; D006801:Humans; D009898:Optic Disk / Q000473:pathology; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D058609:Visual Field Tests / Q000379:methods