Literature DB >> 28508299

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

Nabin R Joshi1, Emma Ly2, Suresh Viswanathan3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the effect of age and test-retest reliability of the intensity response function of the full-field photopic negative response (PhNR) in normal healthy human subjects.
METHODS: Full-field electroretinograms (ERGs) were recorded from one eye of 45 subjects, and 39 of these subjects were tested on two separate days with a Diagnosys Espion System (Lowell, MA, USA). The visual stimuli consisted of brief (<5 ms) red flashes ranging from 0.00625 to 6.4 phot cd.s/m2, delivered on a constant 7 cd/m2 blue background. PhNR amplitudes were measured at its trough from baseline (BT) and from the preceding b-wave peak (PT), and b-wave amplitude was measured at its peak from the preceding a-wave trough or baseline if the a-wave was not present. The intensity response data of all three ERG measures were fitted with a generalized Naka-Rushton function to derive the saturated amplitude (V max), semisaturation constant (K) and slope (n) parameters. Effect of age on the fit parameters was assessed with linear regression, and test-retest reliability was assessed with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Bland-Altman analysis. Holm's correction was applied to account for multiple comparisons.
RESULTS: V max of BT was significantly smaller than that of PT and b-wave, and the V max of PT and b-wave was not significantly different from each other. The slope parameter n was smallest for BT and the largest for b-wave and the difference between the slopes of all three measures were statistically significant. Small differences observed in the mean values of K for the different measures did not reach statistical significance. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicated no significant differences between the two test visits for any of the Naka-Rushton parameters for the three ERG measures, and the Bland-Altman plots indicated that the mean difference between test and retest measurements of the different fit parameters was close to zero and within 6% of the average of the test and retest values of the respective parameters for all three ERG measurements, indicating minimal bias. While the coefficient of reliability (COR, defined as 1.96 times the standard deviation of the test and retest difference) of each fit parameter was more or less comparable across the three ERG measurements, the %COR (COR normalized to the mean test and retest measures) was generally larger for BT compared to both PT and b-wave for each fit parameter. The Naka-Rushton fit parameters did not show statistically significant changes with age for any of the ERG measures when corrections were applied for multiple comparisons. However, the V max of BT demonstrated a weak correlation with age prior to correction for multiple comparisons, and the effect of age on this parameter showed greater significance when the measure was expressed as a ratio of the V max of b-wave from the same subject.
CONCLUSION: V max of the BT amplitude measure of PhNR at the best was weakly correlated with age. None of the other parameters of the Naka-Rushton fit to the intensity response data of either the PhNR or the b-wave showed any systematic changes with age. The test-retest reliability of the fit parameters for PhNR BT amplitude measurements appears to be lower than those of the PhNR PT and b-wave amplitude measurements.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aging; Electroretinogram (ERG); Intensity response function; Naka–Rushton; Photopic negative response (PhNR)

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28508299      PMCID: PMC7197057          DOI: 10.1007/s10633-017-9591-0

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


  67 in total

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

Authors:  Jan Kremers; Mounira Jertila; Barbara Link; Gobinda Pangeni; Folkert K Horn
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-01-08       Impact factor: 2.379

2.  The photopic negative response of the flash electroretinogram in retinal vein occlusion.

Authors:  Hongling Chen; Dezheng Wu; Shizhou Huang; Hong Yan
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-08-30       Impact factor: 2.379

3.  The s-cone PHNR and pattern ERG in primary open angle glaucoma.

Authors:  N Drasdo; Y H Aldebasi; Z Chiti; K E Mortlock; J E Morgan; R V North
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 4.799

4.  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

5.  The b-wave of the dark adapted flash electroretinogram in patients with advanced asymmetrical glaucoma and normal subjects.

Authors:  I M Velten; F K Horn; M Korth; K Velten
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 4.638

6.  Properties of electroretinographic intensity-response functions in retinitis pigmentosa.

Authors:  R W Massof; L Wu; D Finkelstein; C Perry; S J Starr; M A Johnson
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  1984-05-30       Impact factor: 2.379

7.  Selective loss of the photopic negative response in patients with optic nerve atrophy.

Authors:  Yasutaka Gotoh; Shigeki Machida; Yutaka Tazawa
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-03

8.  The photopic negative response of flash ERG in nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy.

Authors:  Hongling Chen; Mingzhi Zhang; Shizhou Huang; Dezheng Wu
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-01-23       Impact factor: 2.379

9.  Changes in retinal thickness are correlated with alterations of electroretinogram in eyes with central retinal artery occlusion.

Authors:  Kei Shinoda; Kisaburo Yamada; Celso S Matsumoto; Kenichi Kimoto; Kazuo Nakatsuka
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-04-19       Impact factor: 3.117

10.  Improved electrode for electroretinography.

Authors:  W W Dawson; G L Trick; C A Litzkow
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  1979-09       Impact factor: 4.799

View more
  11 in total

1.  Electoretinographic evidence of retinal ganglion cell-dependent function in schizophrenia.

Authors:  Pantea Moghimi; Nathalia Torres Jimenez; Linda K McLoon; Theoden I Netoff; Michael S Lee; Angus MacDonald; Robert F Miller
Journal:  Schizophr Res       Date:  2019-10-12       Impact factor: 4.939

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.  The influence of mild cataract on ISCEV standard electroretinogram recorded from mydriatic eyes.

Authors:  Atsuhiro Tanikawa; Keita Suzuki; Ryoko Nomura; Hidenori Tanaka; Tadashi Mizuguchi; Yoshiaki Shimada; Masayuki Horiguchi
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-09-12       Impact factor: 2.379

4.  Suppression of connexin 43 phosphorylation promotes astrocyte survival and vascular regeneration in proliferative retinopathy.

Authors:  Nefeli Slavi; Abduqodir H Toychiev; Stylianos Kosmidis; Jessica Ackert; Stewart A Bloomfield; Heike Wulff; Suresh Viswanathan; Paul D Lampe; Miduturu Srinivas
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-06-11       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  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

6.  ISCEV extended protocol for the photopic negative response (PhNR) of the full-field electroretinogram.

Authors:  Laura Frishman; Maja Sustar; Jan Kremers; J Jason McAnany; Marc Sarossy; Radouil Tzekov; Suresh Viswanathan
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-05-31       Impact factor: 2.379

7.  Optimizing a Portable ERG Device for Glaucoma Clinic: The Effect of Interstimulus Frequency on the Photopic Negative Response.

Authors:  Flora Hui; Jessica Tang; Xavier Hadoux; Michael Coote; Jonathan G Crowston
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2018-12-21       Impact factor: 3.283

8.  A Comparison of the RETeval Sensor Strip and DTL Electrode for Recording the Photopic Negative Response.

Authors:  Jessica Tang; Flora Hui; Xavier Hadoux; Marc Sarossy; Peter van Wijngaarden; Michael Coote; Jonathan G Crowston
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2018-12-21       Impact factor: 3.283

9.  Photopic negative response (PhNR) in the diagnosis and monitoring of raised intracranial pressure in children: a prospective cross-sectional and longitudinal protocol.

Authors:  Oliver Rajesh Marmoy; Emma Hodson-Tole; Dorothy Ann Thompson
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-07-20       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 10.  The photopic negative response (PhNR): measurement approaches and utility in glaucoma.

Authors:  Matteo Prencipe; Tommaso Perossini; Giampaolo Brancoli; Mario Perossini
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-07-31       Impact factor: 2.031

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.