OBJECTIVE: To characterize dark-adapted and light-adapted oscillatory potentials (OPs) in human electroretinogram (EGR) elicited by flashing light stimulation of the same intensity. METHODS: Dark- and light-adapted ERGs of normal eyes were studied. The frequency spectra of the extracted dark-adapted OPs and light-adapted OPs were analyzed by a fast Fourier transform. The peak frequency, latency and total power of the OPs were determined. RESULTS: The averaged peak frequency, latency, and power of the dark-adapted OPs was 125.3∓9.93 Hz, 41.7∓3.56 ms, and 9.25∓5.55 (V·s)(2), as compared with 79.5∓6.79 Hz, 50.8∓5.36 ms, and 3.56∓2.18 (V·s)(2) for light-adapted Ops, respectively, showing significant differences in the parameters between dark- and light-adapted Ops (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with dark-adapted OPs, light-adapted Ops is characterized by a lower peak frequency and a lower power with a prolonged latency.
OBJECTIVE: To characterize dark-adapted and light-adapted oscillatory potentials (OPs) in human electroretinogram (EGR) elicited by flashing light stimulation of the same intensity. METHODS: Dark- and light-adapted ERGs of normal eyes were studied. The frequency spectra of the extracted dark-adapted OPs and light-adapted OPs were analyzed by a fast Fourier transform. The peak frequency, latency and total power of the OPs were determined. RESULTS: The averaged peak frequency, latency, and power of the dark-adapted OPs was 125.3∓9.93 Hz, 41.7∓3.56 ms, and 9.25∓5.55 (V·s)(2), as compared with 79.5∓6.79 Hz, 50.8∓5.36 ms, and 3.56∓2.18 (V·s)(2) for light-adapted Ops, respectively, showing significant differences in the parameters between dark- and light-adapted Ops (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with dark-adapted OPs, light-adapted Ops is characterized by a lower peak frequency and a lower power with a prolonged latency.