HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Dolan, F. M. Articles by Evans, A. L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Dolan, F. M. Articles by Evans, A. L.

Multifocal Electroretinographic Features of Central Retinal Vein Occlusion

¹From the Department of Ophthalmology, and the ²ElectroDiagnostic Imaging Unit, Tennent Institute of Ophthalmology, Gartnavel Hospital, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom; and the ³Department of Clinical Physics and Bio-engineering, Southern General Hospital, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom.

PURPOSE. To determine the features of wide-field multifocal electroretinography (WF-mfERG) recorded in patients with central retinal vein occlusion (CRVO) and to compare WF-mfERG responses of the affected and fellow eyes. In addition, WF-mfERG responses were also compared by using standard electroretinography (ERG).

METHODS. WF-mfERG and ERG responses were recorded from both eyes of 56 patients with CRVO. The WF-mfERG responses, obtained using a custom-built system were grouped into central and peripheral rings. The P1 amplitudes, and P1 and N1 implicit times were grouped and averaged within both rings. Nonparametric statistical analysis was used to compare the ERG results from the affected and fellow eyes. The results were also compared with normative data (5% to 95% confidence limits).

RESULTS. CRVO markedly affected all the parameters of the WF-mfERG. In the affected eyes, 98% of the central and 91% of the peripheral P1 implicit times fell outside the normal range, as opposed to 35% of the 30-Hz flicker implicit times. The WF-mfERG responses obtained from eyes with CRVO were significantly different (P < 0.01) from those derived from the fellow eye. The central and peripheral P1 implicit times were also abnormal in 59.2% and 46.9% of the fellow eyes, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS. WF-mfERG is more susceptible than the standard ERG to changes in the nonlinear dynamics of the eye due to the multiple frequencies of stimulation used to record WF-mfERG responses. WF-mfERG could be a sensitive indicator of the underlying disease affecting the retina in eyes with CRVO and may have a role in the clinical setting.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. W. Bronson-Castain, M. A. Bearse Jr, Y. Han, M. E. Schneck, S. Barez, and A. J. Adams Association between Multifocal ERG Implicit Time Delays and Adaptation in Patients with Diabetes Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., November 1, 2007; 48(11): 5250 - 5256. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]