PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess eye movements during a multifocal ERG (mfERG) recording. This study evaluated the relationship between bivariate contour ellipse areas (BCEAs), mfERG amplitudes (Amps) and mfERG implicit times (ITs) with repeat testing and experienced subjects. METHODS: Thirty subjects were selected (15 experienced to ocular procedures and 15 novices). All were confirmed to have healthy retinas and at least 20/25 vision. MfERGs with a stimulus near 100% contrast and 4-min m-sequence were recorded on two different days using our common clinical technique, which did not constrain the head. VERIS with fundus monitoring system was used for recording with a Burian-Allen electrode. An external camera captured the fundus during each mfERG recording. The optic nerve head position was tracked in each video using a custom algorithm in order to determine BCEAs. Each subject performed one mfERG on two different days. MfERGs were analyzed for Amps and ITs for the fovea and whole eye. RESULTS: There was no correlation between the mfERG metrics and BCEAs with repeat testing. There were also no differences between the experienced and novice subjects for mfERG Amps, ITs or BCEAs. Eye movements between visits were highly correlated (multiple r = 0.67). BCEAs were larger during mfERGs (1.04 ± 0.8 deg2) than those observed in previous literature using brief viewing tasks (< 0.3 deg2). The proportion of time spent fixating within 1.0 and 2.0 degrees of the central hexagon was 68 and 93%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to evaluate the stability of the retina while recording a mfERG in healthy subjects and indicates that the center of fixation during a mfERG stays within the central hexagon. Eye stability during an initial recording is the best indicator of stability on the second recording. The amount of movement during these recordings did not seem to affect the mfERG Amps or ITs. These data suggest clinical confidence with mfERGs when recording novice patients.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess eye movements during a multifocal ERG (mfERG) recording. This study evaluated the relationship between bivariate contour ellipse areas (BCEAs), mfERG amplitudes (Amps) and mfERG implicit times (ITs) with repeat testing and experienced subjects. METHODS: Thirty subjects were selected (15 experienced to ocular procedures and 15 novices). All were confirmed to have healthy retinas and at least 20/25 vision. MfERGs with a stimulus near 100% contrast and 4-min m-sequence were recorded on two different days using our common clinical technique, which did not constrain the head. VERIS with fundus monitoring system was used for recording with a Burian-Allen electrode. An external camera captured the fundus during each mfERG recording. The optic nerve head position was tracked in each video using a custom algorithm in order to determine BCEAs. Each subject performed one mfERG on two different days. MfERGs were analyzed for Amps and ITs for the fovea and whole eye. RESULTS: There was no correlation between the mfERG metrics and BCEAs with repeat testing. There were also no differences between the experienced and novice subjects for mfERG Amps, ITs or BCEAs. Eye movements between visits were highly correlated (multiple r = 0.67). BCEAs were larger during mfERGs (1.04 ± 0.8 deg2) than those observed in previous literature using brief viewing tasks (< 0.3 deg2). The proportion of time spent fixating within 1.0 and 2.0 degrees of the central hexagon was 68 and 93%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to evaluate the stability of the retina while recording a mfERG in healthy subjects and indicates that the center of fixation during a mfERG stays within the central hexagon. Eye stability during an initial recording is the best indicator of stability on the second recording. The amount of movement during these recordings did not seem to affect the mfERG Amps or ITs. These data suggest clinical confidence with mfERGs when recording novice patients.
Authors: Caren Bellmann; Mary Feely; Michael D Crossland; Stamatina A Kabanarou; Gary S Rubin Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 12.079