Steady‐state pattern electroretinogram and short‐duration transient visual evoked potentials in glaucomatous and healthy eyes. (20th July 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Amarasekera, Dilru C; Resende, Arthur F; Waisbourd, Michael; Puri, Sanjeev; Moster, Marlene R; Hark, Lisa A; Katz, L Jay; Fudemberg, Scott J; Mantravadi, Anand V
• Is Part Of: Clinical & experimental ophthalmology. Volume 46:Number 1(2018)
• Page Start: 54
• Page End: 61
• Publication Date: 2017-07-20
• Subjects: glaucoma -- short‐duration transient visual evoked potentials -- steady‐state pattern electroretinogram; Ophthalmology -- Periodicals; 617.7
• DOI: 10.1111/ceo.13006
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1442-6404

Abstract

Abstract: Importance: This study evaluates two rapid electrophysiological glaucoma diagnostic tests that may add a functional perspective to glaucoma diagnosis. Background: This study aimed to determine the ability of two office‐based electrophysiological diagnostic tests, steady‐state pattern electroretinogram and short‐duration transient visual evoked potentials, to discern between glaucomatous and healthy eyes. Design: This is a cross‐sectional study in a hospital setting. Participants: Forty‐one patients with glaucoma and 41 healthy volunteers participated in the study. Methods: Steady‐state pattern electroretinogram and short‐duration transient visual evoked potential testing was conducted in glaucomatous and healthy eyes. A 64‐bar‐size stimulus with both a low‐contrast and high‐contrast setting was used to compare steady‐state pattern electroretinogram parameters in both groups. A low‐contrast and high‐contrast checkerboard stimulus was used to measure short‐duration transient visual evoked potential parameters in both groups. Main Outcome Measures: Steady‐state pattern electroretinogram parameters compared were MagnitudeD, MagnitudeD/Magnitude ratio, and the signal‐to‐noise ratio. Short‐duration transient visual evoked potential parameters compared were amplitude and latency. Results: MagnitudeD was significantly lower in glaucoma patients when using a low‐contrast ( P = 0.001) and high‐contrast ( P < 0.001) 64‐bar‐size steady‐state pattern electroretinogram stimulus. MagnitudeD/Magnitude ratio and SNR were significantly lower in the glaucoma group when using a high‐contrast 64‐bar‐size stimulus ( P < 0.001 and P = 0.010, respectively). Short‐duration transient visual evoked potential amplitude and latency were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusions and relevance: Steady‐state pattern electroretinogram was effectively able to discern between glaucomatous and healthy eyes. Steady‐state pattern electroretinogram may thus have a role as a clinically useful electrophysiological diagnostic tool.