Isaac Wang1, Naheed W Khan2, Kari Branham2, B Wissinger3, Susanne Kohl3, J R Heckenlively4. 1. Kellogg Eye Center, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, MI 48105, USA. 2. Kellogg Eye Center, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA. 3. Molecular Genetics Laboratory and Molecular Genetics of Sensory Systems, Institute for Ophthalmic Research, Centre for Ophthalmology, Röntgenweg 11, 72076, Tübingen, Germany. 4. Kellogg Eye Center, University of Michigan Medical Center, Ann Arbor, MI, 48105, USA. jrheck@umich.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To establish the normal range of values for rod-isolated b-wave amplitudes in achromatopsia and cone dystrophies. METHODS: We reviewed charts of 112 patients with various types of cone dystrophy, and compared their standardized electroretinographic rod b-wave amplitudes with age-matched normal controls. Twenty-six patients had known mutations in achromatopsia and cone dystrophy genes, while 53 were characterized by their inheritance pattern since they had yet to have their gene identified. Visual acuity information and scotomata were documented. RESULTS: We found that patients with achromatopsia and cone dystrophy had rod b-wave amplitudes that were significantly lower than age-matched controls, but found no evidence of rod amplitude progression nor loss of peripheral visual fields in the study group. CONCLUSIONS: We found that cone dystrophy patients of all types had depressed rod-isolated ERGs across the board. If typical diagnostic criteria are used, these patients might be considered to have "abnormal" rod-isolated electroretinographic values, and might be called "cone-rod dystrophy", even though the waveforms are stable for years. Patients with cone-rod dysfunction patterns on ERG can be better understood by also performing kinetic (Goldmann) visual fields, which will help to distinguish cone dystrophies from progressive cone-rod dystrophies by central scotomata size and progression over time in many forms of cone-rod dystrophy.
PURPOSE: To establish the normal range of values for rod-isolated b-wave amplitudes in achromatopsia and cone dystrophies. METHODS: We reviewed charts of 112 patients with various types of cone dystrophy, and compared their standardized electroretinographic rod b-wave amplitudes with age-matched normal controls. Twenty-six patients had known mutations in achromatopsia and cone dystrophy genes, while 53 were characterized by their inheritance pattern since they had yet to have their gene identified. Visual acuity information and scotomata were documented. RESULTS: We found that patients with achromatopsia and cone dystrophy had rod b-wave amplitudes that were significantly lower than age-matched controls, but found no evidence of rod amplitude progression nor loss of peripheral visual fields in the study group. CONCLUSIONS: We found that cone dystrophypatients of all types had depressed rod-isolated ERGs across the board. If typical diagnostic criteria are used, these patients might be considered to have "abnormal" rod-isolated electroretinographic values, and might be called "cone-rod dystrophy", even though the waveforms are stable for years. Patients with cone-rod dysfunction patterns on ERG can be better understood by also performing kinetic (Goldmann) visual fields, which will help to distinguish cone dystrophies from progressive cone-rod dystrophies by central scotomata size and progression over time in many forms of cone-rod dystrophy.
Entities:
Keywords:
Achromatopsia; Central scotomata; Cone dystrophy; Cone-rod interaction; Rod electroretinogram
Authors: S Johnson; M Michaelides; I A Aligianis; J R Ainsworth; J D Mollon; E R Maher; A T Moore; D M Hunt Journal: J Med Genet Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 6.318
Authors: Jianhua Xu; Lynsie M Morris; Stylianos Michalakis; Martin Biel; Steven J Fliesler; David M Sherry; Xi-Qin Ding Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2012-03-01 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Huimin Wu; Jill A Cowing; Michel Michaelides; Susan E Wilkie; Glen Jeffery; Sharon A Jenkins; Viktoria Mester; Alan C Bird; Anthony G Robson; Graham E Holder; Anthony T Moore; David M Hunt; Andrew R Webster Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2006-07-24 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Sureka Thiagalingam; Terri L McGee; Richard G Weleber; Michael A Sandberg; Karmen M Trzupek; Eliot L Berson; Thaddeus P Dryja Journal: Ophthalmic Genet Date: 2007-09 Impact factor: 1.803