IOVS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Garway-Heath, D. F.
Right arrow Articles by Hitchings, R. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Garway-Heath, D. F.
Right arrow Articles by Hitchings, R. A.
(Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science. 2002;43:2213-2220.)
© 2002 by The Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, Inc.

Relationship between Electrophysiological, Psychophysical, and Anatomical Measurements in Glaucoma

David F. Garway-Heath1, Graham E. Holder2, Fred W. Fitzke3 and Roger A. Hitchings1

1 From the Glaucoma Research Unit and the 2 Department of Electrophysiology, Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom; and the 3 Department of Visual Science, Institute of Ophthalmology, London, United Kingdom.


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
PURPOSE. To evaluate the relationship between electrophysiological, psychophysical, and structural measurements in normal and glaucomatous eyes and to test the hypothesis that there is a continuous structure–function relationship between ganglion cell numbers and visual field sensitivity.

METHODS. Thirty-four normal subjects and 40 patients with glaucoma were examined with the pattern electroretinogram (PERG), perimetry and retinal tomography. Transient and steady state (SS) PERGs were recorded, and peak (P)-to-trough (N) amplitude was measured. The unit of differential light sensitivity (DLS) in perimetry is the decibel. The decibel is 10 · log(1/Lambert), where the Lambert is the unit of test spot intensity. PERG amplitudes were correlated with decibel and 1/Lambert DLS for the central 18° of the visual field and with neuroretinal rim area in the temporal part of the optic disc. Age-related changes in the structural and functional measurements were sought. The correlation between variables was investigated by linear and quadratic regression analysis. A quadratic (y = ax + bx2 + c) fit was taken to be significantly better than a linear fit, if the coefficient (b) for the x2 term was significant at P < 0.05.

RESULTS. A quadratic fit between decibel DLS and PERG amplitude (transient PERG: R2 = 0.40, P = 0.0000; SS PERG: R2 = 0.32, P = 0.0000) was significantly better than a linear fit. There was a linear correlation between 1/Lambert DLS and PERG amplitude (transient PERG: R2 = 0.44, P = 0.0000; SS PERG: R2 = 0.35, P = 0.0000). There was a linear correlation between temporal neuroretinal rim area and PERG amplitude (transient PERG: R2 = 0.17, P = 0.0003; SS PERG: R2 = 0.20, P = 0.0001). A quadratic fit between decibel DLS and temporal neuroretinal rim area (R2 = 0.38, P = 0.0000) was significantly better than a linear fit. There was a linear correlation between 1/Lambert DLS and temporal neuroretinal rim area (R2 = 0.30, P = 0.0000). Both DLS and PERG amplitude declined with age in the normal subjects. The rate of decline was -0.17%, -0.74%, -0.75%, and -0.78% per year for decibel DLS, 1/Lambert DLS, transient PERG, and SS PERG, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS. There is a curvilinear relationship between decibel DLS and both PERG amplitude and neuroretinal rim area, and a linear relationship between 1/Lambert DLS and PERG amplitude and neuroretinal rim area. These findings support the hypothesis that there is no ganglion cell functional reserve but a continuous structure–function relationship, and that the impression of a functional reserve results from the logarithmic (decibel) scaling of the visual field.


   Introduction
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
The relationship between functional and anatomical measurements in primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) is of fundamental importance to our ability to infer the extent of glaucomatous damage and to estimate rates of disease progression from such measurements. The extent of visual field loss is commonly used to estimate the severity of POAG, and scoring systems have been developed both to stage and describe progression of POAG.1 2 Several studies suggest that visual field loss is preceded by neuroretinal rim loss3 4 5 6 and that progression of disc change may be detected before that of visual field change.7 However, the precise nature of the relationship between visual field loss and anatomical measurements is poorly understood.

Visual function, as measured by white-on-white perimetry, is typically recorded in the logarithmic decibel (dB) scale. In considering the relationship between functional and structural measurements, there is evidence that the relationship between decibel light sensitivity and ganglion cell number is curvilinear8 9 and that the curvilinear relationship may be explained at least in part by the logarithmic scale.9 Ganglion cell axon number correlates with the neuroretinal rim area,10 and a curvilinear relationship has also been reported between decibel visual field sensitivity and neuroretinal rim measurements.11 12 13 14 Large changes in neuroretinal rim area and corresponding small changes in decibel values are seen when the rim area is large, and small changes in neuroretinal rim area and corresponding large changes in decibel values are seen when the rim area is small. The logarithmic scale accentuates sensitivity changes in the visual field at low-decibel levels and minimizes changes at high-decibel levels. Thus visual function changes are less apparent in the early stages of structural damage, giving the impression that structural changes occur first.

The pattern electroretinogram (PERG) is believed to reflect function in the inner retina15 16 17 and represents a massed ganglion cell response to a suprathreshold stimulus.18 PERG amplitudes should be related to the number of functioning ganglion cells in the retina. Amplitudes have been reported to be reduced in glaucomatous eyes,19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and a correlation of PERG amplitude with visual field sensitivity22 26 27 28 and optic disc structure22 29 and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness30 31 has been reported. The previous literature on the PERG and glaucoma has recently been reviewed.32

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between differential light sensitivity (DLS), PERG amplitudes, and neuroretinal rim area in normal and glaucomatous eyes and to test the hypothesis that there is a continuous structure–function relationship between ganglion cell number and visual field sensitivity.


   Methods
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Normal control subjects and patients with early glaucomatous field defects were recruited prospectively as part of a study on the early detection of glaucoma. All subjects gave informed consent to the investigations, and the study conformed to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki. Each had the following examinations: medical and ocular history, tonometry, slit-lamp biomicroscopy, PERG, visual field testing, and imaging by retinal tomography.

Normal Subjects
Subjects recruited were friends or spouses of patients attending the Ocular Hypertension Clinic at Moorfields Eye Hospital, hospital staff, or volunteers responding to advertisements on the hospital bulletin boards and in a pensioners’ magazine. Restriction criteria were white ethnic group, ametropia less than 6 D, visual acuity of 20/30 or better, normal visual fields, intraocular pressure of less than 21 mm Hg, no previous ocular history involving the posterior segment, and no family history of glaucoma in a first-degree relative. All subjects with normal field test results were included, regardless of optic disc appearance. One eye was included in the study, chosen at random if both were eligible. Thirty-four subjects satisfied the criteria for the study.

Patients with Glaucoma
Subjects were taken from the hospital’s general glaucoma clinic (n = 33) and from the ocular hypertension clinic (n = 7). The former were referred to the study on the basis of visual field defect and history of ocular hypertension only. The latter were patients with ocular hypertension in whom reproducible visual field defects developed while they were under review. Restriction criteria were white ethnic group, ametropia less than 6 D, visual acuity of 20/30 or better, a reproducible visual field defect, open anterior chamber angle, intraocular pressure more than 21 mm Hg at diagnosis, no miotic therapy, and no other posterior segment eye disease. Intraocular pressures were controlled by topical ß-blocker medication only, or after surgery. All subjects with a reproducible visual field defect and a history of ocular hypertension were included, regardless of optic disc appearance. One eye was included in the study, chosen at random if both were eligible. Forty subjects satisfied the criteria for the study.

Pattern Electroretinogram
The pattern electroretinogram (PERG) was recorded with gold foil corneal electrodes and a reference electrode on the skin near the lateral canthus. The checkerboard stimulus subtends 16° by 22° on the retina and comprises checks of between 95% and 98% contrast, with each check subtending 0.5° (Fig. 1) . Transient responses were recorded at a pattern-reversal rate of 3 Hz and steady state (SS) responses at a pattern reversal rate of 8 Hz. Approximately 250 sweeps were averaged for each response, and at least four responses were recorded for each eye. PERG test results were reported by a consultant electrophysiologist (GH) who was masked to the subject diagnosis. Because of the inherent difficulty in accurately establishing a baseline, the magnitude of the transient response was measured from the peak (P) of the P50 component to the trough (N) of the N95 component, as recommended by the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision.33



View larger version (139K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 1. The position of the PERG stimulus overlaid on a fundus photograph. The stimulus check size is 0.5°. The stimulus area and check size are to scale.

 
Visual Field Testing
All visual field testing was performed using the Humphrey Field Analyzer’s (model 640 with StatPac-2; Zeiss-Humphrey Systems, Dublin, CA) 24-2 full threshold strategy, with the Goldmann size III target. Near refractive correction was used, calculated according to the subjects’ age by the perimeter software. Reliability criteria applied were fixation losses less than 30%, false-positive responses less than 15%, and false-negative responses less than 30%.

A normal visual field was taken to be one in which the retinal sensitivity at all locations was better than the eccentricity-related thresholds given in the Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study (AGIS) protocol.1 A glaucomatous visual field was taken to be one in which a defect scoring 1 or more in the AGIS protocol was reproduced on three successive occasions at the same location.

Imaging
All subjects were imaged by tomography (Heidelberg Retina Tomograph ([HRT]; Heidelberg Engineering GmbH, Heidelberg, Germany) in the 10° x 10° frame. All images were obtained by one of two trained technicians. Imaging was performed at the 1.5-cm imaging head–eye distance recommended in the instruction manual, as the subject viewed a distant fixation target. Each patient had three high-quality scan series recorded at one sitting. The quality of images was assessed with the aid of the HRT software and by the experience of the technician. The mean topography of the three–scan series was used for the analysis (HRT software ver 2.01). Images with a mean SD of height measures of more than 50 µm were excluded from further analysis. The contour line of the optic disc edge was drawn by one of the authors (DFGH). The standard reference plane was used.

Recruitment was restricted to the white ethnic group, because it is known that optic disc morphology can vary between different ethnic groups.34 35 Visual field and PERG tests and HRT imaging were performed within 4 months of each other in all subjects.

Data Analysis and Statistics
The DLS at the central 16 test points (18° x 18°) corresponds to the area tested in the PERG (Fig. 2) . The decibel is 10 · log (1/Lambert). Mean DLS was calculated for the central 16 points in the decibel and the 1/Lambert scales.



View larger version (146K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 2. The position of the perimeter’s 24-2 stimulus pattern overlaid on a fundus photograph. The stimulus size is 0.43°. The stimulus spacing and size are to scale. The box encloses the points included in the analyses to compare with PERG amplitudes and neuroretinal rim areas.

 
The relationship between visual field locations and regions of the optic disc has been described previously.36 The temporal half of the optic disc receives ganglion cell axons from the central 16 test points of the visual field and the area tested in the PERG (Fig. 3) . Neuroretinal rim area was recorded for the temporal three of the six predefined segments given in the HRT analysis. Parameter differences between groups were assessed with a two-tailed t-test assuming unequal variance.



View larger version (42K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 3. The relationship between the central visual field and optic disc, derived from a published optic disc–visual field map.36

 
The following correlations were assessed in the combined normal–glaucoma group: PERG amplitude and central visual field sensitivity, PERG amplitude and temporal neuroretinal rim area, and central visual field sensitivity and temporal neuroretinal rim area. In addition, the relationship between age and PERG amplitude, central visual field sensitivity, and temporal neuroretinal rim area was investigated in the normal group.

Correlations between measurements were sought by linear or quadratic regression analysis. A quadratic (y = ax + bx2 + c) fit was taken to be significantly better than a linear fit if the coefficient (b) for the x2 term was significant at P < 0.05. Statistical significance was assumed at P <= 0.05 for all analyses.

Statistical analyses were performed on computer (SPSS for Windows, ver.10.0; SPSS Science, Chicago, IL; Excel 97 SR-2; Microsoft, Redmond, WA).


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
Discussion
 References
 
The study population characteristics are summarized in Table 1 . There was a range in severity of visual field loss in the glaucoma group. Thirty subjects had a mean deviation (MD) of more than -5 dB, seven had an MD of between -5 and -10 dB, and three had an MD of between -10 and -15 dB.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1. Study Population Characteristics

 
The transient and SS PERGs, central visual field mean DLS in decibels and 1/Lambert, and the HRT temporal neuroretinal rim areas are shown in Table 2 . All parameter values were significantly lower in the glaucoma group.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 2. PERG Values, Central Mean DLS, and Temporal Neuroretinal Rim Area

 
PERG amplitudes (R2 = 0.15, P < 0.02 for the transient and R2 = 0.25, P < 0.002 for the SS) and both decibel and 1/Lambert visual field central mean DLS (both R2 = 0.32, P < 0.0005) correlated significantly with age in the normal group. The rates of change were -0.75%, -0.78%, -0.17%, and -0.74% per year for the transient PERG response, the SS PERG response, decibel mean sensitivity and 1/Lambert mean sensitivity, respectively. Temporal neuroretinal rim area did not correlate with age.

There was a significant correlation between central visual field mean DLS and PERG amplitude in the combined normal–glaucoma groups. A quadratic fit was significantly better than a linear fit for regression of PERG amplitude on decibel DLS: transient PERG R2 = 0.40, P < 0.0000 (Fig. 4) and SS R2 = 0.32, P < 0.0000. A linear fit was significantly better than a quadratic fit for regression of PERG amplitude on 1/Lambert DLS: transient PERG R2 = 0.44, P < 0.0000 (Fig. 5) and SS R2 = 0.35, P < 0.0000. A 50% reduction in 1/Lambert DLS (equivalent to 3 dB) was associated with a 36% reduction in transient and SS PERG amplitude. These analyses were also significant when the normal and glaucoma groups were taken separately.



View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 4. Plot of central visual field mean sensitivity in decibels against transient PERG (N+P) amplitude.

 


View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 5. Plot of central visual field mean sensitivity in 1/Lambert against transient PERG (N+P) amplitude.

 
When the data from normal eyes were entered into a multiple linear regression analysis, with age and transient PERG as independent variables and 1/Lambert DLS as the dependent variable, the significance of the coefficient for the age term was P < 0.005 and for the PERG term was P > 0.05. In a similar analysis of the combined group of normal and glaucomatous eyes the significance of the coefficient for the age term was P < 0.001 and for the PERG term was P < 0.001.

There was significant correlation between temporal neuroretinal rim area and central visual field mean DLS. Quadratic regression gave the best fit for the correlation of neuroretinal rim area with decibel values (R2 = 0.38, P < 0.0000, Fig. 6 ), and linear regression gave the best fit for the correlation of rim area with 1/Lambert values (R2 = 0.30, P < 0.0000, Fig. 7 ). These analyses were not significant when the normal and glaucoma groups were taken separately. A 50% reduction in 1/Lambert DLS (equivalent to 3 dB) was associated with a 32% reduction in temporal neuroretinal rim area.



View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 6. Plot of central visual field mean sensitivity in decibels against temporal neuroretinal rim area.

 


View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 7. Plot of central visual field mean sensitivity in 1/Lambert against temporal neuroretinal rim area.

 
There was significant correlation between temporal neuroretinal rim area PERG amplitudes. Linear regression gave the best fit for the correlation of rim area with the transient (R2 = 0.17, P < 0.0003, Fig. 8 ) and SS (R2 = 0.20, P < 0.0001) PERG amplitude. These analyses were not significant when the normal and glaucoma groups were taken separately.



View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 8. Plot of transient PERG (N+P) amplitude against temporal neuroretinal rim area.

 

   Discussion
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
References
 
When assessing a patient with glaucoma, it is essential to estimate the amount of glaucomatous damage to set appropriate treatment targets. The amount of glaucomatous damage is usually estimated from the magnitude of visual field loss and extent of neuroretinal rim loss in the optic disc. It is important to understand how field and rim loss are related to each other to identify correctly the stage of disease. Similarly, when assessing the rate of glaucomatous progression, it is important to know whether the relationship between the amount of ganglion cell loss and the measurement of visual function is linear. If there is a curvilinear correlation of decibel DLS with ganglion cell number, then linear models of decibel DLS progression underestimate the rate of change when decibel DLS is near normal and overestimate the rate of progression when field loss is already moderately advanced. The results of this study confirm previous reports of a curvilinear relationship between neuroretinal rim area and decibel visual field loss (Fig. 6) ,11 12 14 and support the suggestion that the DLS scale of 1/Lambert (Fig. 7) is a more appropriate scale when comparing structural and functional measurements.9 This suggestion is reinforced further by the curvilinear relationship between PERG amplitude and decibel DLS (Fig. 4) and the linear relationship between PERG amplitude and 1/Lambert DLS (Fig. 5) and temporal neuroretinal rim area (Fig. 8) .

Previous studies have reported a correlation of PERG amplitude and visual field sensitivity,22 26 28 and one study has demonstrated hemifield PERG–DLS correlations.27 Bach et al.28 and Korth et al.,22 in studies using similar methodology, found that in patients with glaucoma, the PERG is often abnormal, even when there are no defects in the central visual field. This finding is supported by the results of our study, which demonstrated large changes in PERG amplitude and corresponding small changes in decibel DLS when the central mean sensitivity was near normal (Fig. 4) . However, the linear relationships between 1/Lambert DLS, PERG amplitude, and neuroretinal rim area suggest that there is no functional reserve in the visual system that has to be lost before glaucomatous optic nerve damage manifests. Instead, it suggests that there is a continuous, linear, structure–function relationship, with the number of ganglion cells linearly related to 1/Lambert DLS.9 The impression of a functional reserve is given by the logarithmic nature of the decibel DLS scale. In addition, in the individual patient, because of the high test–retest variability and the nonspecificity of diffuse sensitivity loss in the visual field, structural damage at the optic disc is frequently identified before reproducible visual field defects. This adds to the impression of a functional reserve.

Although the PERG and perimetry both test aspects of visual function, they differ in their nature. The PERG is an objective measure of massed ganglion cell responses to a suprathreshold stimulus, whereas perimetry depends on subjective responses to a threshold stimulus.

Both the PERG amplitude and the perimetric response threshold might be expected to be determined by the relationship of stimulus area to ganglion cell density. The stimulus areas are similar in both tests: The PERG stimulus was a 0.5° square within a regular checkerboard and the perimetric stimulus measured 0.43°. Neither test used stimuli scaled to account for changes in ganglion cell density with eccentricity. Thus, spatial summation effects are not accounted for in either test. These similarities between the tests probably account for the striking correlation between PERG amplitude and 1/Lambert DLS in this study (Fig. 5) .

PERG amplitude was less strongly related to temporal neuroretinal rim area than to DLS. This is in agreement with a previous study,22 although the correlation in this study, using the HRT to quantify neuroretinal rim area, was slightly better than that in the previous report in which planimetry was used. It is not surprising that the PERG amplitude and DLS correlated well, because they both measure related aspects of visual function. The neuroretinal rim area is a surrogate for, not a direct measurement of, ganglion cell number. It is a measure of ganglion cell axon cross-sectional area, of varying obliquity, depending on the course of fibers through the disc, together with other elements, such as supporting glia and blood vessels. The measured rim area may be affected by the slope of the rim–cup edge and positioning of the reference plane by the retinal tomograph’s software.37 Because axon size is related to ganglion cell eccentricity and axons from near the fovea enter the disc at its temporal side, the relationship between ganglion cell number and neuroretinal rim area may change around the circumference of the disc. These factors may explain the relatively poor correlation between the measurements of structure and function.

Visual function declined with increasing subject age, and this largely, although not completely, explained the relationship between DLS and PERG amplitude in the normal group. However, the relationship between DLS and PERG amplitude in the combined normal–glaucoma group cannot be explained by age-related changes in visual function alone, because the relationship remained significant when age was introduced into the regression model. The age-related rate of decline in decibel DLS in this study is almost identical with that reported by Heijl et al.38 However, the rate of decline measured in the 1/Lambert scale is in much better agreement with the rate of decline measured by the PERG. This further supports the notion that DLS is better expressed in the 1/Lambert scale than in the logarithmic decibel scale. The age-related decline in PERG amplitude, of -0.75% per year, is in good agreement with previous reports: -0.54%,22 -0.61%,39 and -0.71%.40

It is important to consider possible confounding factors in the study. Most of the patients with glaucoma were taken from the general glaucoma clinic and, although concordance of optic disc and visual field change was not a requirement for entry into the study, the diagnosis of glaucoma often requires such concordance. However, all patients had ocular hypertension at diagnosis and had reproducible visual field defects, and it is not thought that patients with these features would be excluded from the clinic if nonconcordant optic disc change were present. If this bias is present, it may affect strength of the optic disc–visual function relationship, but probably not the linear–curvilinear pattern.

Lens opacity and age-related miosis may account for some of the correlation between the visual field and PERG results, even though a visual acuity of better than 20/40 was required in all subjects. However, the age-related decline in ganglion cell numbers, estimated at approximately 0.36% to 0.62% per year in cross-sectional histologic41 42 43 44 45 and imaging46 studies, may account for most of the 0.75% per year loss of DLS and PERG amplitude. Other factors may play a role in the age-related DLS and PERG amplitude reduction. Senile miosis has been implicated,39 although this cannot explain the age-related change in some protocols.22 Subject age, which may be viewed as a surrogate measure of changes such as unquantified lens opacity, miosis, and age-related ganglion cell loss, accounts for most of the relationship between DLS and PERG amplitude in the normal subjects. This was not the case in the combined normal and glaucoma group, in which glaucoma-related ganglion cell loss was presumably an important factor. The likely effect of the age-related factors is to increase the strength of the DLS–PERG relationship but not the linear–curvilinear pattern.

In summary, the findings in this study of a linear relationship between PERG amplitude, 1/Lambert DLS and neuroretinal rim area support the hypothesis that there is no ganglion cell functional reserve, but a continuous structure–function relationship.


   Footnotes
 
Supported by Guide Dogs for the Blind Association and the Moorfields Eye Hospital Special Trustees.

Submitted for publication November 6, 2001; revised February 25, 2002; accepted March 15, 2002.

Commercial relationships policy: N.

The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by page charge payment. This article must therefore be marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. §1734 solely to indicate this fact.

Corresponding author: David F. Garway-Heath, Glaucoma Research Unit, Moorfields Eye Hospital, City Road, London, EC1V 2PD, UK; david.garway-heath{at}moorfields.nhs.uk.


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. Advanced Glaucoma Intervention Study. 2: visual field test scoring and reliability Ophthalmology 1994;101,1445-1455[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  2. Katz, J. (1999) Scoring systems for measuring progression of visual field loss in clinical trials of glaucoma treatment Ophthalmology 106,391-395[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  3. Sommer, A, Pollack, I, Maumenee, AE. (1979) Optic disc parameters and onset of glaucomatous field loss. I: methods and progressive changes in disc morphology Arch Ophthalmol 97,1444-1448[Abstract]
  4. Motolko, M, Drance, SM. (1981) Features of the optic disc in preglaucomatous eyes Arch Ophthalmol 99,1992-1995[Abstract]
  5. Pederson, JE, Anderson, DR. (1980) The mode of progressive disc cupping in ocular hypertension and glaucoma Arch Ophthalmol 98,490-495[Abstract]
  6. Airaksinen, PJ, Tuulonen, A, Alanko, HI. (1992) Rate and pattern of neuroretinal rim area decrease in ocular hypertension and glaucoma Arch Ophthalmol 110,206-210[Abstract]
  7. Zeyen, TG, Caprioli, J. (1993) Progression of disc and field damage in early glaucoma Arch Ophthalmol 111,62-65[Abstract]
  8. Harwerth, RS, Carter-Dawson, L, Shen, F, Smith, EL, III, Crawford, ML. (1999) Ganglion cell losses underlying visual field defects from experimental glaucoma Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 40,2242-2250[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Garway-Heath, DF, Caprioli, J, Fitzke, FW, Hitchings, RA. (2000) Scaling the hill of vision: the physiological relationship between ganglion cell numbers and light sensitivity Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 41,1774-1782[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Yucel, YH, Gupta, N, Kalichman, MW, et al (1998) Relationship of optic disc topography to optic nerve fiber number in glaucoma Arch Ophthalmol 116,493-497[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Airaksinen, PJ, Drance, SM, Douglas, GR, Schulzer, M. (1985) Neuroretinal rim areas and visual field indices in glaucoma Am J Ophthalmol 99,107-110[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  12. Jonas, JB, Grundler, AE. (1997) Correlation between mean visual field loss and morphometric optic disk variables in the open-angle glaucomas Am J Ophthalmol 124,488-497[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  13. Garway-Heath, DF, Viswanathan, A, Westcott, M, et al (1999) Relationship between perimetric light sensitivity and optic disc neuroretinal rim area Wall, M Wild, JM eds. Perimetry Update 1998/1999 ,381-389 Kugler Publications The Hague, The Netherlands.
  14. Bartz-Schmidt, KU, Thumann, G, Jonescu-Cuypers, CP, Krieglstein, GK. (1999) Quantitative morphologic and functional evaluation of the optic nerve head in chronic open-angle glaucoma Surv Ophthalmol 44(suppl 1),S41-S53
  15. Maffei, L, Fiorentini, A. (1981) Electroretinographic responses to alternating gratings before and after section of the optic nerve Science 211,953-956[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Arden, GB, Vaegan,, Hogg, CR. (1982) Clinical and experimental evidence that the pattern electroretinogram (PERG) is generated in more proximal retinal layers than the focal electroretinogram Ann NY Acad Sci 388,580-607[Abstract]
  17. Holder, GE. (2001) Pattern electroretinography (PERG) and an integrated approach to visual pathway diagnosis Prog Retinal Eye Res 20,531-561[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  18. Viswanathan, S, Frishman, LJ, Robson, JG. (2000) The uniform field and pattern ERG in macaques with experimental glaucoma: removal of spiking activity Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 41,2797-2810[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Fiorentini, A, Maffei, L, Pirchio, M, et al (1981) The ERG in response to alternating gratings in patients with diseases of the peripheral visual pathway Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 21,490-493[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Holder, GE. (1987) Significance of abnormal pattern electroretinography in anterior visual pathway dysfunction Br J Ophthalmol 71,166-171[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Weinstein, GW, Arden, GB, Hitchings, RA, et al (1988) The pattern electroretinogram (PERG) in ocular hypertension and glaucoma Arch Ophthalmol 106,923-928[Abstract]
  22. Korth, M, Horn, F, Storck, B, Jonas, J. (1989) The pattern-evoked electroretinogram (PERG): age-related alterations and changes in glaucoma Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 227,123-130[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  23. Watanabe, I, Iijima, H, Tsukahara, S. (1989) The pattern electroretinogram in glaucoma: an evaluation by relative amplitude from the Bjerrum area Br J Ophthalmol 73,131-135[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Pfeiffer, N, Bach, M. (1992) The pattern-electroretinogram in glaucoma and ocular hypertension: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study Ger J Ophthalmol 1,35-40[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  25. Ruben, ST, Arden, GB, O’Sullivan, F, Hitchings, RA. (1995) Pattern electroretinogram and peripheral colour contrast thresholds in ocular hypertension and glaucoma: comparison and correlation of results Br J Ophthalmol 79,326-331[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Neoh, C, Kaye, SB, Brown, M, Ansons, AM, Wishart, P. (1994) Pattern electroretinogram and automated perimetry in patients with glaucoma and ocular hypertension Br J Ophthalmol 78,359-362[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Graham, SL, Wong, VA, Drance, SM, Mikelberg, FS. (1994) Pattern electroretinograms from hemifields in normal subjects and patients with glaucoma Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 35,3347-3356[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Bach, M, Sulimma, F, Gerling, J. (1998) Little correlation of the pattern electroretinogram (PERG) and visual field measures in early glaucoma Doc Ophthalmol 94,253-263
  29. Salgarello, T, Colotto, A, Falsini, B, et al (1999) Correlation of pattern electroretinogram with optic disc cup shape in ocular hypertension Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 40,1989-1997[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Parisi, V, Manni, G, Spadaro, M, et al (1999) Correlation between morphological and functional retinal impairment in multiple sclerosis patients Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 40,2520-2527[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Parisi, V, Manni, G, Centofanti, M, et al (2001) Correlation between optical coherence tomography, pattern electroretinogram, and visual evoked potentials in open-angle glaucoma patients Ophthalmology 108,905-912[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  32. Holder, GE. (2001) The pattern electroretinogram Fishman, GA Birch, DG Holder, GE Brignell, MG eds. Ophthalmology Monograph 2: Electrophysiologic Testing in Disorders of the Retina, Optic Nerve, and Visual Pathway 2nd ed. ,197-235 The Foundation of the American Academy of Ophthalmology San Francisco.
  33. Bach, M, Hawlina, M, Holder, GE, et al (2000) Standard for pattern electroretinography: International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision Doc Ophthalmol 101,11-18[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  34. Beck, RW, Messner, DK, Musch, DC, Martonyi, CL, Lichter, PR. (1985) Is there a racial difference in physiologic cup size? Ophthalmology 92,873-876[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  35. Chi, T, Ritch, R, Stickler, D, et al (1989) Racial differences in optic nerve head parameters Arch Ophthalmol 107,836-839[Abstract]
  36. Garway-Heath, DF, Poinoosawmy, D, Fitzke, FW, Hitchings, RA. (2000) Mapping the visual field to the optic disc in normal tension glaucoma eyes Ophthalmology 107,1809-1815[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  37. Burk, RO, Vihanninjoki, K, Bartke, T, et al (2000) Development of the standard reference plane for the Heidelberg retina tomograph Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 238,375-384[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  38. Heijl, A, Lindgren, G, Olsson, J. (1987) Normal variability of static perimetric threshold values across the central visual field Arch Ophthalmol 105,1544-1549[Abstract]
  39. Trick, GL, Nesher, R, Cooper, DG, Shields, SM. (1992) The human pattern ERG: alteration of response properties with aging Optom Vis Sci 69,122-128[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  40. Hull, BM, Drasdo, N. (1990) The influence of age on the pattern-reversal electroretinogram Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 10,49-53[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  41. Balazsi, AG, Rootman, J, Drance, SM, Schulzer, M, Douglas, GR. (1984) The effect of age on the nerve fiber population of the human optic nerve Am J Ophthalmol 97,760-766[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  42. Johnson, BM, Miao, M, Sadun, AA. (1987) Age-related decline of human optic nerve axon populations Age 10,5-9
  43. Mikelberg, FS, Drance, SM, Schulzer, M, Yidegiligne, HM, Weis, MM. (1989) The normal human optic nerve: axon count and axon diameter distribution Ophthalmology 96,1325-1328[Medline][Order article via Infotrieve]
  44. Jonas, JB, Muller Bergh, JA, Schlotzer Schrehardt, UM, Naumann, GO. (1990) Histomorphometry of the human optic nerve Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 31,736-744[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  45. Jonas, JB, Schmidt, AM, Muller Bergh, JA, Schlotzer Schrehardt, UM, Naumann, GO. (1992) Human optic nerve fiber count and optic disc size Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 33,2012-2018[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  46. Garway-Heath, DF, Wollstein, G, Hitchings, RA. (1997) Aging changes of the optic nerve head in relation to open angle glaucoma Br J Ophthalmol 81,840-845[Abstract/Free Full Text]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 IOVSHome page
A. Hot, M. W. Dul, and W. H. Swanson
Development and Evaluation of a Contrast Sensitivity Perimetry Test for Patients with Glaucoma
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., July 1, 2008; 49(7): 3049 - 3057.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 IOVSHome page
S. Machida, Y. Gotoh, Y. Toba, A. Ohtaki, M. Kaneko, and D. Kurosaka
Correlation between Photopic Negative Response and Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness and Optic Disc Topography in Glaucomatous Eyes
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., May 1, 2008; 49(5): 2201 - 2207.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 IOVSHome page
C. Boden, K. Chan, P. A. Sample, J. Hao, T.-W. Lee, L. M. Zangwill, R. N. Weinreb, and M. H. Goldbaum
Assessing Visual Field Clustering Schemes Using Machine Learning Classifiers in Standard Perimetry
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., December 1, 2007; 48(12): 5582 - 5590.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 IOVSHome page
C. K.-s. Leung, F. A. Medeiros, L. M. Zangwill, P. A. Sample, C. Bowd, D. Ng, C. Y. L. Cheung, D. S. C. Lam, and R. N. Weinreb
American Chinese Glaucoma Imaging Study: A Comparison of the Optic Disc and Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer in Detecting Glaucomatous Damage
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., June 1, 2007; 48(6): 2644 - 2652.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 IOVSHome page
H. K. Falkenberg and P. J. Bex
Sources of Motion-Sensitivity Loss in Glaucoma
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., June 1, 2007; 48(6): 2913 - 2921.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 IOVSHome page
T. A. Mai, N. J. Reus, and H. G. Lemij
Structure-Function Relationship Is Stronger with Enhanced Corneal Compensation than with Variable Corneal Compensation in Scanning Laser Polarimetry
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., April 1, 2007; 48(4): 1651 - 1658.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 IOVSHome page
V. Porciatti, M. Saleh, and M. Nagaraju
The Pattern Electroretinogram as a Tool to Monitor Progressive Retinal Ganglion Cell Dysfunction in the DBA/2J Mouse Model of Glaucoma
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., February 1, 2007; 48(2): 745 - 751.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 IOVSHome page
L. M. Ventura, N. Sorokac, R. D. L. Santos, W. J. Feuer, and V. Porciatti
The Relationship between Retinal Ganglion Cell Function and Retinal Nerve Fiber Thickness in Early Glaucoma.
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., September 1, 2006; 47(9): 3904 - 3911.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 IOVSHome page
C. Bowd, L. M. Zangwill, F. A. Medeiros, I. M. Tavares, E. M. Hoffmann, R. R. Bourne, P. A. Sample, and R. N. Weinreb
Structure-function relationships using confocal scanning laser ophthalmoscopy, optical coherence tomography, and scanning laser polarimetry.
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., July 1, 2006; 47(7): 2889 - 2895.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 IOVSHome page
N. J. Reus and H. G. Lemij
Relationships between Standard Automated Perimetry, HRT Confocal Scanning Laser Ophthalmoscopy, and GDx VCC Scanning Laser Polarimetry
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., November 1, 2005; 46(11): 4182 - 4188.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 IOVSHome page
C. K.-s. Leung, K. K.-L. Chong, W.-m. Chan, C. K.-F. Yiu, M.-y. Tso, J. Woo, M.-K. Tsang, K.-k. Tse, and W.-h. Yung
Comparative Study of Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Measurement by StratusOCT and GDx VCC, II: Structure/Function Regression Analysis in Glaucoma
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., October 1, 2005; 46(10): 3702 - 3711.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 IOVSHome page
E. A. Essock, Y. Zheng, and P. Gunvant
Analysis of GDx-VCC Polarimetry Data by Wavelet-Fourier Analysis across Glaucoma Stages
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., August 1, 2005; 46(8): 2838 - 2847.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 IOVSHome page
D. C. Hood, L. Xu, P. Thienprasiddhi, V. C. Greenstein, J. G. Odel, T. M. Grippo, J. M. Liebmann, and R. Ritch
The Pattern Electroretinogram in Glaucoma Patients with Confirmed Visual Field Deficits
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., July 1, 2005; 46(7): 2411 - 2418.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch OphthalmolHome page
G. Wollstein, J. S. Schuman, L. L. Price, A. Aydin, P. C. Stark, E. Hertzmark, E. Lai, H. Ishikawa, C. Mattox, J. G. Fujimoto, et al.
Optical Coherence Tomography Longitudinal Evaluation of Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness in Glaucoma
Arch Ophthalmol, April 1, 2005; 123(4): 464 - 470.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch OphthalmolHome page
V. C. Greenstein, P. Thienprasiddhi, R. Ritch, J. M. Liebmann, and D. C. Hood
A Method for Comparing Electrophysiological, Psychophysical, and Structural Measures of Glaucomatous Damage
Arch Ophthalmol, September 1, 2004; 122(9): 1276 - 1284.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 IOVSHome page
P. G. Schlottmann, S. De Cilla, D. S. Greenfield, J. Caprioli, and D. F. Garway-Heath
Relationship between Visual Field Sensitivity and Retinal Nerve Fiber Layer Thickness as Measured by Scanning Laser Polarimetry
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., June 1, 2004; 45(6): 1823 - 1829.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 IOVSHome page
N. J. Reus and H. G. Lemij
The Relationship between Standard Automated Perimetry and GDx VCC Measurements
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., March 1, 2004; 45(3): 840 - 845.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 IOVSHome page
W. H. Swanson, J. Felius, and F. Pan
Perimetric Defects and Ganglion Cell Damage: Interpreting Linear Relations Using a Two-Stage Neural Model
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., February 1, 2004; 45(2): 466 - 472.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 IOVSHome page
B. Fortune, L. Wang, B. V. Bui, G. Cull, J. Dong, and G. A. Cioffi
Local Ganglion Cell Contributions to the Macaque Electroretinogram Revealed by Experimental Nerve Fiber Layer Bundle Defect
Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., October 1, 2003; 44(10): 4567 - 4579.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services