Literature DB >> 10947008

Effects of refractive blur on the multifocal electroretinogram.

A M Palmowski1, T Berninger, R Allgayer, H Andrielis, B Heinemann-Vernaleken, G Rudolph.   

Abstract

A significant difference in the response density of the MF-ERG response has been suggested for every 2 diopter change of refraction. The influence of refractive blur on the MF-ERG was studied in 8 healthy volunteers using either the VERISTM system (Group A: n=5) or Retiscan(TM) (Group B: n=3). For each eye recordings were obtained with a corrective lens of -3 dpt, 0 dpt, +3 dpt and +6 dpt placed in front of the contact lens electrode. The viewing distance was adjusted to compensate for the induced changes in the retinal image size. When the changes in retinal image size due to the refractive lens were compensated for, no influence due to refraction was observed in either latencies or amplitudes of (KI (P > 0.05). This held true for the central response average (four degrees) as well as for the outer 6-25 degrees. In KII.1 only the peripheral amplitudes of Group B showed an influence due to refraction (P < or = 0.05). This may be due to adaptation as the recordings of group B were obtained in succession. As expected, significant differences were observed when the recordings obtained with the different systems were compared (P < or = 0.05).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10947008     DOI: 10.1023/a:1002432113628

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0012-4486            Impact factor:   2.379


  7 in total

1.  Fundamental differences between the nonlinearities of pattern and focal electroretinograms.

Authors:  E E Sutter
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  1990-11       Impact factor: 2.379

2.  The field topography of ERG components in man--I. The photopic luminance response.

Authors:  E E Sutter; D Tran
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  The spatial distribution of ERG losses across the posterior pole of glaucomatous eyes in multifocal recordings.

Authors:  L Buckland
Journal:  Aust N Z J Ophthalmol       Date:  1996-05

4.  ERG campimetry using a multi-input stimulation technique for mapping of retinal function in the central visual field.

Authors:  U Kretschmann; K Rüther; T Usui; E Zrenner
Journal:  Ophthalmic Res       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 2.892

Review 5.  The pattern electroretinogram.

Authors:  T A Berninger; G B Arden
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 3.775

6.  Mapping of retinal function in diabetic retinopathy using the multifocal electroretinogram.

Authors:  A M Palmowski; E E Sutter; M A Bearse; W Fung
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 4.799

7.  Clinical evaluation of multifocal electroretinogram.

Authors:  M Kondo; Y Miyake; M Horiguchi; S Suzuki; A Tanikawa
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 4.799

  7 in total
  11 in total

1.  Accommodation limits induced optical defocus in defocus experiments.

Authors:  Herbert Jägle; Ditta Zobor; Thomas Brauns
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-06-11       Impact factor: 2.379

2.  The influence of defocus on multifocal visual evoked potentials.

Authors:  Christina Pieh; Michael B Hoffmann; Michael Bach
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-09-10       Impact factor: 3.117

3.  Influence of dopamine deficiency in early Parkinson's disease on the slow stimulation multifocal-ERG.

Authors:  Anja M Palmowski-Wolfe; Maria Timoner Perez; Stefanie Behnke; Gerhard Fuss; Martin Martziniak; Klaus W Ruprecht
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-06-22       Impact factor: 2.379

4.  Topographical alterations of inner retinal activity during systemic hyperoxia-hypercapnia in normal subjects and patients with type 1 diabetes.

Authors:  Anne Kurtenbach; Traugott Dietrich; Eberhart Zrenner; Hana Langrová
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-01-23       Impact factor: 2.379

5.  Detection of retinal dysfunction in vitelliform macular dystrophy using the multifocal ERG (MF-ERG).

Authors:  Anja M Palmowski; Reiner Allgayer; Bernhild Heinemann-Vernaleken; Volker Scherer; Klaus W Ruprecht
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 2.379

6.  Effect of refractive errors on multifocal VEP responses and standard automated perimetry tests in a single population.

Authors:  Makoto Nakamura; Kei Kato; Seiko Kamata; Kumiko Ishikawa; Takayuki Nagai
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-03-11       Impact factor: 2.379

7.  Slow-stimulated multifocal ERG in high- and normal-tension glaucoma.

Authors:  Anja M Palmowski-Wolfe; Reiner J Allgayer; Bernhild Vernaleken; Andy Schötzau; Klaus W Ruprecht
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-06-19       Impact factor: 2.379

8.  Can we do without mydriasis in multifocal ERG recordings?

Authors:  Charlotte M Poloschek; Michael Bach
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-09-10       Impact factor: 2.379

9.  A comparison of the fast stimulation multifocal-ERG in patients with an IOL and control groups of different age.

Authors:  Anja M Palmowski-Wolfe; Ursula Woerdehoff
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-03-02       Impact factor: 2.379

10.  Multifocal ERG responses in infants.

Authors:  Ronald M Hansen; Anne Moskowitz; Anne B Fulton
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2008-08-21       Impact factor: 4.799

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.