PURPOSE: To compare the patterns of local cone and rod system impairment in patients with progressive cone dystrophy (CD) using psychophysical and electrophysiological techniques. METHODS: Local cone system function was assessed by measuring cone system thresholds (visual fields) and cone-mediated multifocal electroretinograms (mfERGs). Rod system function was assessed by measuring rod system thresholds (visual fields) and rod-mediated mfERGs. The results in a group of eight patients with CD were compared with those in an age-similar control group. RESULTS: All the patients had abnormal cone system visual field thresholds and cone-mediated mfERGs. Cone system psychophysical thresholds were elevated for targets presented within the central 10 degrees, but were within normal limits for targets at peripheral locations. Cone-mediated mfERG measures of amplitude scale and time scale were abnormal for most of the hexagons tested. Most of the rod-mediated psychophysical thresholds and mfERGs were within normal limits. Rod system losses tended to be patchy and scattered throughout the area tested. CONCLUSIONS: There was poor correspondence among local measures of cone and rod system losses in these patients with CD. The results suggest that the spatial pattern of cone system losses in this disease differs from the spatial pattern of rod system losses.
PURPOSE: To compare the patterns of local cone and rod system impairment in patients with progressive cone dystrophy (CD) using psychophysical and electrophysiological techniques. METHODS: Local cone system function was assessed by measuring cone system thresholds (visual fields) and cone-mediated multifocal electroretinograms (mfERGs). Rod system function was assessed by measuring rod system thresholds (visual fields) and rod-mediated mfERGs. The results in a group of eight patients with CD were compared with those in an age-similar control group. RESULTS: All the patients had abnormal cone system visual field thresholds and cone-mediated mfERGs. Cone system psychophysical thresholds were elevated for targets presented within the central 10 degrees, but were within normal limits for targets at peripheral locations. Cone-mediated mfERG measures of amplitude scale and time scale were abnormal for most of the hexagons tested. Most of the rod-mediated psychophysical thresholds and mfERGs were within normal limits. Rod system losses tended to be patchy and scattered throughout the area tested. CONCLUSIONS: There was poor correspondence among local measures of cone and rod system losses in these patients with CD. The results suggest that the spatial pattern of cone system losses in this disease differs from the spatial pattern of rod system losses.
Authors: Marcus A Bearse; Anthony J Adams; Ying Han; Marilyn E Schneck; Jason Ng; Kevin Bronson-Castain; Shirin Barez Journal: Prog Retin Eye Res Date: 2006-09-01 Impact factor: 21.198
Authors: Athanasios Panorgias; Megan Tillman; Erich E Sutter; Ala Moshiri; Christina Gerth-Kahlert; John S Werner Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 4.799