PURPOSE: To analyse the sensitivity of the '2 global flash' multifocal electroretinogram (mfERG) to detect glaucomatous dysfunction in normal tension (NTG) and high tension primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) patients. METHODS: MfERGs were recorded from 20 NTG and 20 POAG patients and compared to those of 20 controls. The mfERG array consisted of 103 hexagons. Each m-sequence step started with a focal flash that could be either dark or light (m-sequence: 2--13, L(max): 200 cd/m(2), L(min): 1 cd/m(2)), followed by two global flashes (L(max): 200 cd/m(2)) at an interval of approximately 26 ms. Focal scalar products (SP) were calculated using focal templates derived from the control recordings (VERIS 4.8). We analyzed 5 response averages (central 7.5 degrees and 4 adjoining quadrants) of the response to the focal flash, the direct component at 10-40 ms (DC) and the following two components induced by the effects of the preceding focal flash on the response to the global flashes at 40-70 ms (IC-1) and at 70-100 ms (IC-2). RESULTS: Both NTG and POAG patients differed from controls in the IC-1 response to the superior quadrants, and POAG patients also differed from controls in the centre. The most sensitive parameter was the IC-1 of the superior temporal quadrant with an area under the ROC curve of 0.82 for POAG and 0.79 for NTG. The DC and the IC-2 did not differ significantly between the groups. When all five response averages of the IC-1 were taken into consideration 90% of the NTG patients and 85% of the POAG patients were correctly classified as abnormal while 80% of the control subjects were correctly classified as normal. CONCLUSIONS: This stimulus sequence holds promise for the diagnosis of early functional changes in POAG. A new finding is that both NTG, as well as POAG can be differentiated from control subjects.
PURPOSE: To analyse the sensitivity of the '2 global flash' multifocal electroretinogram (mfERG) to detect glaucomatous dysfunction in normal tension (NTG) and high tension primary open angle glaucoma (POAG) patients. METHODS: MfERGs were recorded from 20 NTG and 20 POAG patients and compared to those of 20 controls. The mfERG array consisted of 103 hexagons. Each m-sequence step started with a focal flash that could be either dark or light (m-sequence: 2--13, L(max): 200 cd/m(2), L(min): 1 cd/m(2)), followed by two global flashes (L(max): 200 cd/m(2)) at an interval of approximately 26 ms. Focal scalar products (SP) were calculated using focal templates derived from the control recordings (VERIS 4.8). We analyzed 5 response averages (central 7.5 degrees and 4 adjoining quadrants) of the response to the focal flash, the direct component at 10-40 ms (DC) and the following two components induced by the effects of the preceding focal flash on the response to the global flashes at 40-70 ms (IC-1) and at 70-100 ms (IC-2). RESULTS: Both NTG and POAG patients differed from controls in the IC-1 response to the superior quadrants, and POAG patients also differed from controls in the centre. The most sensitive parameter was the IC-1 of the superior temporal quadrant with an area under the ROC curve of 0.82 for POAG and 0.79 for NTG. The DC and the IC-2 did not differ significantly between the groups. When all five response averages of the IC-1 were taken into consideration 90% of the NTGpatients and 85% of the POAG patients were correctly classified as abnormal while 80% of the control subjects were correctly classified as normal. CONCLUSIONS: This stimulus sequence holds promise for the diagnosis of early functional changes in POAG. A new finding is that both NTG, as well as POAG can be differentiated from control subjects.
Authors: D C Hood; V C Greenstein; K Holopigian; R Bauer; B Firoz; J M Liebmann; J G Odel; R Ritch Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2000-05 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: L J Frishman; S Saszik; R S Harwerth; S Viswanathan; Y Li; E L Smith; J G Robson; G Barnes Journal: Doc Ophthalmol Date: 2000 Impact factor: 2.379
Authors: Patrick H W Chu; Yiu-fai Ng; Chi-ho To; Kwok-fai So; Brian Brown; Henry H L Chan Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2011-09-01 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Anna A Ledolter; Matthias Monhart; Andreas Schoetzau; Margarita G Todorova; Anja M Palmowski-Wolfe Journal: Doc Ophthalmol Date: 2015-01-24 Impact factor: 2.379
Authors: Anna A Ledolter; Sophie A Kramer; Margarita G Todorova; Andreas Schötzau; Anja M Palmowski-Wolfe Journal: Doc Ophthalmol Date: 2012-12-08 Impact factor: 2.379
Authors: Xunda Luo; Nimesh B Patel; Lakshmi P Rajagopalan; Ronald S Harwerth; Laura J Frishman Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2014-06-26 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: S A Kramer; A A Ledolter; M G Todorova; A Schötzau; S Orgül; A M Palmowski-Wolfe Journal: Doc Ophthalmol Date: 2012-11-20 Impact factor: 2.379