Literature DB >> 16273914

Assessment of the dark-adaptation time required for recovery of electroretinographic responses in dogs after fundus photography and indirect ophthalmoscopy.

Nalinee Tuntivanich1, A Lexi Mentzer, Danielle M Eifler, Fabiano Montiani-Ferreira, Janice Q Forcier, Cheri A Johnson, Simon M Petersen-Jones.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the duration of dark-adaptation time required for recovery of electroretinographic responses after fundus photography or indirect ophthalmoscopy in dogs. ANIMALS: 6 dogs. PROCEDURE: Initially, scotopic-intensity series of electroretinograms (ERGs) were recorded after 20 minutes of dark adaptation. The fundus of the left eye of each dog was photographed (n = 10) or examined via indirect ophthalmoscopy for 5 minutes with moderate- (117 candela [cd]/m2) or bright-intensity (1,693 cd/m2) light; ERGs were repeated after a further 20 or 60 minutes of dark adaptation (6 procedures/dog).
RESULTS: Following 20 minutes of dark adaptation after fundus photography, the b- and a-wave amplitudes were reduced in response to brighter stimuli, compared with pretest ERGs; after 60 minutes of dark adaptation, ERG amplitudes had recovered. Following 20 minutes of dark adaptation after indirect ophthalmoscopy (moderate-intensity light), significantly lower b-wave amplitudes were recorded in response to 2 of the brighter flash stimuli, compared with pretest ERGs; after 60 minutes of dark adaptation, ERG amplitudes had recovered. Following 20 minutes of dark adaptation after indirect ophthalmoscopy (bright-intensity light), all ERG amplitudes were significantly decreased and implicit times were significantly decreased at several flash intensities, compared with pretest ERGs; after 60 minutes of dark adaptation, ERG amplitudes and implicit times had returned to initial values, except for b-wave amplitudes recorded in response to dimmer stimuli. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results suggest that at least 60 minutes of dark adaptation should be allowed before ERGs are performed in dogs after fundus photography or indirect ophthalmoscopy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16273914     DOI: 10.2460/ajvr.2005.66.1798

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Vet Res        ISSN: 0002-9645            Impact factor:   1.156


  7 in total

1.  Characterization of an Early-Onset, Autosomal Recessive, Progressive Retinal Degeneration in Bengal Cats.

Authors:  Ron Ofri; Christopher M Reilly; David J Maggs; Paul G Fitzgerald; Yael Shilo-Benjamini; Kathryn L Good; Robert A Grahn; Danielle D Splawski; Leslie A Lyons
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 4.799

2.  The normal electroretinogram in adult healthy Shih Tzu dogs using the HMsERG.

Authors:  June-sub Lee; Kyung-hee Kim; Ha-young Jang; Bora Lee; Joon Young Kim; Soon-wuk Jeong
Journal:  J Vet Sci       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 1.672

3.  Guidelines for clinical electroretinography in the dog: 2012 update.

Authors:  Björn Ekesten; András M Komáromy; Ron Ofri; Simon M Petersen-Jones; Kristina Narfström
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-06-01       Impact factor: 2.379

4.  Normal clinical electroretinography parameters for poodle, Labrador retriever, Thai ridgeback, and Thai Bangkaew.

Authors:  Metita Sussadee; Janjira Phavaphutanon; Kornchai Kornkaewrat; Aree Thayananuphat
Journal:  J Vet Sci       Date:  2014-09-30       Impact factor: 1.672

5.  Dark adaptation time in canine electroretinography using a contact lens electrode with a built-in light source.

Authors:  Seiya Maehara; Yoshiki Itoh; Sho Hoshino; Miri Hayashi; Yosuke Ito
Journal:  J Vet Med Sci       Date:  2015-06-13       Impact factor: 1.267

Review 6.  Modelling Neurological Diseases in Large Animals: Criteria for Model Selection and Clinical Assessment.

Authors:  Samantha L Eaton; Fraser Murdoch; Nina M Rzechorzek; Gerard Thompson; Claudia Hartley; Benjamin Thomas Blacklock; Chris Proudfoot; Simon G Lillico; Peter Tennant; Adrian Ritchie; James Nixon; Paul M Brennan; Stefano Guido; Nadia L Mitchell; David N Palmer; C Bruce A Whitelaw; Jonathan D Cooper; Thomas M Wishart
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2022-08-25       Impact factor: 7.666

7.  Influence of recording electrode type and reference electrode position on the canine electroretinogram.

Authors:  Alice E Mentzer; Danielle M Eifler; Fabiano Montiani-Ferreira; Nalinee Tuntivanich; Janice Q Forcier; Simon M Petersen-Jones
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-03-02       Impact factor: 1.854

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.