Literature DB >> 22227776

Spectral characteristics of the PhNR in the full-field flash electroretinogram of normals and glaucoma patients.

Jan Kremers1, Mounira Jertila, Barbara Link, Gobinda Pangeni, Folkert K Horn.   

Abstract

Flash electroretinogram responses were measured in normal subjects to different chromatic combinations of flashes and backgrounds. The amplitudes of the flash response components were measured at different flash strengths and could be described by a generalized Naka-Rushton function. The measurements were repeated at different background luminances to study adaptation effects. It was found that when flash strength and background luminance were expressed in photometric terms (cd s/m² and cd/m², respectively), then the responses were very similar for all chromatic combinations with the exception of the condition in which blue (peak wavelength 458 nm) was flashed upon an orange (peak wavelength 591 nm) background. We propose that in this condition, a second (possibly S-cone or rod-driven) mechanism intrudes. The negative response after the b-wave (here called "photopic negative response" or PhNR for all conditions) is thought to reflect ganglion cell activity and was also largest at this condition. Responses were measured to the 458 nm flash on 591 nm background and the reversed combination in a population of 39 normal subjects and 49 glaucoma patients. It was found that the PhNR amplitude was affected by glaucoma in all conditions. Other component parameters, reflecting responses and adaptation dynamics, were not altered. The best stimulus condition among the conditions used to separate the PhNR amplitude of normals and patients was a 1 cd s/m² 458 nm flash on a 10 cd/m² 591 nm background.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22227776     DOI: 10.1007/s10633-011-9304-z

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


  16 in total

1.  The photopic ERG luminance-response function (photopic hill): method of analysis and clinical application.

Authors:  Marianne Rufiange; Justine Dassa; Olga Dembinska; Robert K Koenekoop; John M Little; Robert C Polomeno; Marie Dumont; Sylvain Chemtob; Pierre Lachapelle
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 1.886

2.  The photopic hill: a new phenomenon of the light adapted electroretinogram.

Authors:  N Wali; L E Leguire
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 2.379

3.  The photopic negative response of the flash electroretinogram in primary open angle glaucoma.

Authors:  S Viswanathan; L J Frishman; J G Robson; J W Walters
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 4.799

4.  Light adaptation of primate cones: an analysis based on extracellular data.

Authors:  J M Valeton; D van Norren
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Red-green cone interactions in the increment-threshold spectral sensitivity of primates.

Authors:  H G Sperling; R S Harwerth
Journal:  Science       Date:  1971-04-09       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  The photopic negative response of the macaque electroretinogram: reduction by experimental glaucoma.

Authors:  S Viswanathan; L J Frishman; J G Robson; R S Harwerth; E L Smith
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 4.799

7.  The photopic negative response of the blue-on-yellow flash-electroretinogram in glaucomas and normal subjects.

Authors:  Nina Wakili; Folkert K Horn; Anselm G Jünemann; Nhung X Nguyen; Christian Y Mardin; Matthias Korth; Jan Kremers
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-02-14       Impact factor: 2.379

8.  The luminance-response function of the human photopic electroretinogram: a mathematical model.

Authors:  R Hamilton; M A Bees; C A Chaplin; D L McCulloch
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2007-09-24       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  Optic disc morphometry in chronic primary open-angle glaucoma. I. Morphometric intrapapillary characteristics.

Authors:  J B Jonas; G C Gusek; G O Naumann
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 3.117

10.  StAR: a simple tool for the statistical comparison of ROC curves.

Authors:  Ismael A Vergara; Tomás Norambuena; Evandro Ferrada; Alex W Slater; Francisco Melo
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2008-06-05       Impact factor: 3.169

View more
  16 in total

1.  Intensity response function of the photopic negative response (PhNR): effect of age and test-retest reliability.

Authors:  Nabin R Joshi; Emma Ly; Suresh Viswanathan
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-05-15       Impact factor: 2.379

2.  Photopic negative response using a handheld mini-ganzfeld stimulator in healthy adults: normative values, intra- and inter-session variability.

Authors:  Adriana Berezovsky; Rustum Karanjia; Arthur Gustavo Fernandes; Gabriel Izan Santos Botelho; Tatiane Luana Novele Bueno; Nívea Nunes Ferraz; Paula Yuri Sacai; Stuart Glenn Coupland; Alfredo Arrigo Sadun; Solange Rios Salomão
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-07-17       Impact factor: 2.379

3.  Characteristics of late negative ERG responses elicited by sawtooth flicker.

Authors:  Sowjanya Gowrisankaran; Mohamed A Genead; Anastasios Anastasakis; Kenneth R Alexander
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-10-06       Impact factor: 2.379

4.  The photopic negative response of the Light-adapted 3.0 ERG in clinical settings.

Authors:  Gonzalo Ortiz; David Drucker; Connor Hyde; Joseph Staffetti; Jan Kremers; Radouil Tzekov
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-10-01       Impact factor: 2.379

Review 5.  Electroretinography in glaucoma diagnosis.

Authors:  Laura J Wilsey; Brad Fortune
Journal:  Curr Opin Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 3.761

6.  Comparison between broadband and monochromatic photopic negative response in full-field electroretinogram in controls and subjects with primary open-angle glaucoma.

Authors:  Aniruddha Banerjee; Mona Khurana; Ramya Sachidanandam; Parveen Sen
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-01-12       Impact factor: 2.379

7.  Comparisons of photopic negative responses elicited by different conditions from glaucomatous eyes.

Authors:  Yuji Hara; Shigeki Machida; Satoshi Ebihara; Masahiko Ishizuka; Atsushi Tada; Tomoharu Nishimura
Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-01-03       Impact factor: 2.447

8.  The Test-Retest Reliability of the Photopic Negative Response (PhNR).

Authors:  Jessica Tang; Thomas Edwards; Jonathan G Crowston; Marc Sarossy
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2014-11-03       Impact factor: 3.283

9.  Relationship between stimulus size and different components of the electroretinogram (ERG) elicited by flashed stimuli.

Authors:  Mathias G Nittmann; Avinash J Aher; Jan Kremers; Radouil Tzekov
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-10-15       Impact factor: 2.379

10.  A Temporal White Noise Analysis for Extracting the Impulse Response Function of the Human Electroretinogram.

Authors:  Andrew J Zele; Beatrix Feigl; Pradeep K Kambhampati; Avinash Aher; Declan McKeefry; Neil Parry; John Maguire; Ian Murray; Jan Kremers
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2017-11-01       Impact factor: 3.283

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.