Documenta Ophthalmologica

, Volume 94, Issue 3, pp 253–263 | Cite as

Little correlation of the pattern electroretinogram (PERG) and visual field measures in early glaucoma

  • Michael BachEmail author
  • Frauke Sulimma
  • Jürgen Gerling


Pattern-electroretinograms (PERG) to checkerboard reversal at 16/s. 0.8° and 15° check size and visual fields (Octopus G1) were retrospectively analyzed in 40 eyes of 30 patients with early glaucoma. The mean visual field defect was calculated separately for the central 26°×34° covered by the PERG stimulus (MDc) and the more peripheral area (MDp) surrounding the stimulus. Deeper field loss was correlated with a reduced pattern electroretinogram amplitude (p<0.01 for both MDp and MDc), indicating that the pattern electroretinogram deteriorates as glaucoma advances. If the analysis was confined to those 18 eyes (16 patients) that had no field defect within the area covered by the PERG stimulus (normal MDc but abnormal MDp), 13 of these had an abnormal PERG amplitude (p<0.001). The results suggest that the PERG can reveal impairment of ganglion cell function that is not detected by conventional perimetry.

Key words

eccentricity glaucoma PERG perimetry visual field 



mean defect


mean defect over the central area


mean defect over the peripheral area


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Groneberg A, Teping C. Topodiagnostik von Sehstörungen durch Ableitung retinaler und kortikaler Antworten auf Umkehr-Kontrastmuster. Ber Dtsch Ophthalmol Ges 1980; 77: 409–15.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Maffei L, Fiorentini A. Electroretinographic responses to alternating gratings before and after section of the optic nerve. Science 1981; 211: 953–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zrenner E. Physiological basis of the pattern electroretinogram. Prog Retinal Res 1989; 9: 427–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bach M, Gerling J, Geiger K. Optic atrophy reduces the pattern-electroretinogram for both fine and coarse stimulus patterns. Clin Vision Sci 1992; 7: 327–33.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Papst N, Bopp M, Schnaudigel O. The pattern evoked electroretinogram associated with elevated intraocular pressure. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1984; 222: 34–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wanger P, Persson H. Pattern-reversal electroretinograms in ocular hypertension. Doc Ophthalmol 1985; 61: 27–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Porciatti V, Falsini B, Brunori S, Colotto A, Moretti G. Pattern electroretinogram as a function of spatial frequency in ocular hypertension and early glaucoma. Doc Ophthalmol 1987; 65: 349–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Marx M, Bodis-Wollner I, Lustgarten J, Podos S. Electrophysiological evidence that early glaucoma affects foveal vision. Doc Ophthalmol 1987; 67: 281–301.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wanger P, Persson H. Pattern-reversal electroretinograms from normotensive, hypertensive and glaucomatous eyes. Ophthalmologica 1987; 195: 205–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Trick G. Pattern reversal retinal potentials in ocular hypertensives at high and low risk of developing glaucoma. Doc Ophthalmol 1987; 65: 79–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Price M, Drance S, Price M, Schulzer M, Douglas G, Tansley B. The pattern electroretinogram and visual-evoked potential in glaucoma. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1988; 226: 542–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Trick G, Bicklerbluth M, Cooper D, Kolker A, Nesher R. Pattern reversal electroretinogram (PRERG) abnormalities in ocular hypertension; correlation with glaucoma risk factors. Curr Eye Res 1988; 7: 201–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bach M, Hiss P, Röver J. Check-size specific changes of pattern electroretinogram in patients with early open-angle glaucoma. Doc Ophthalmol 1988; 69: 315–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Weinstein G, Arden G, Hitchings R, Ryan S, Calthorpe C, Odom V. The pattern electroretinogram (PERG) in ocular hypertension and glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 1988; 106: 923–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zrenner E, Ziegler R, Voss B. Clinical applications of pattern electroretinography: melanoma, retinal detachment and glaucoma. Doc Ophthalmol 1988; 68: 283–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bach M, Speidel-Fiaux A. Pattern electroretinogram in glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Doc Ophthalmol 1989; 73: 173–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wanger P, Persson H. Pattern-reversal electroretinograms and high-pass resolution perimetry in suspected or early glaucoma. Ophthalmology 1987; 94: 1098–103.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pfeiffer N, Tillmon B, Bach M. Predictive value of the pattern-electroretinogram in high-risk ocular hypertension. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1993; 34: 1710–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Marmor M, Holder G, Porciatti V, Trick G, Zrenner E. Guidelines for basic pattern electroretinography: recommendations by the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision. Doc Ophthalmol 1996; 91: 291–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Aulhorn E, Karmeyer H. Frequency distribution in early glaucomatous visual field defects. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser 1976; 14: 75–83.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dawson W, Trick G, Litzkow C. Improved electrode for electroretinography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1979; 18: 988–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Thompson D, Drasdo N. An improved method for using the DTL fibre in electroretinography. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1987; 7: 315–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pfeiffer N, Bach M. The pattern electroretinogram in glaucoma and ocular hypertension: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study. Ger J Ophthalmol 1992; 1: 35–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Otto T, Bach M. Re-test variability and diurnal effects in the pattern electroretinogram (PERG). Doc Ophthalmol 1997; 92: 311–23.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Marx R, Zrenner E. Sensitivity distribution in the central and midperipheral visual field determined by pattern electroretinography and harmonic analysis. Doc Ophthalmol 1989; 73: 347–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Quigley H, Dunkelberger G, Green W. Retinal ganglion cell atrophy correlated with automated perimetry in human eyes with glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 1988; 107: 453–64.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Trick L. Age-related alterations in retinal function. Doc Ophthalmol 1987; 65: 35–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Korth M, Horn F, Storck B, Jonas J. The pattern-evoked electroretinogram (PERG): age-related alterations and changes in glaucoma. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1989; 227: 123–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ederer F. Shall we count numbers of eyes or numbers of subjects? Arch Ophthalmol 1993; 89: 1–2.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Katz J, Zeger S, Liang K. Appropriate statistical methods to account for similarities in binary outcome between fellow eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1994; 35: 2461–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Aulhorn E, Harms H. Early visual field defects in glaucoma. In: Leydhecker W, ed. Glaucoma; Tützing Symposium. Basel: Karger, 1967: 151–86.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Drance S. The early field defects in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1969; 8: 84–91.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Armaly M. Selective perimetry for glaucomatous defects in ocular hypertension. Arch Ophthalmol 1972; 87: 518–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Werner E, Drance S. Early visual field disturbances in glaucoma. Ann Ophthalmol 1977; 85: 1173–5.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Heijl A. Lack of diffuse loss of differential light sensitivity in early glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol 1989; 67: 353–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hart W, Becker B. The onset and evolution of glaucomatous visual field defects. Ophthalmology 1982; 89: 268–79.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Anetil JL, Anderson DR. Early foveal involvement and generalized depression of the visual field in glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 1984; 102: 363–70.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Airaksinen PJ, Drance SM, Douglas GR, Schulzer M, Wijsman K. Visual field and retinal nerve fiber layer comparisons in glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 1985; 103: 205–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Glowatzki A, Flammer J. Is there a difference between glaucoma patients with rather localized visual field damage and patients with more diffuse visual field damage? Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser 1987; 49: 317–20.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Caprioli J, Sears M, Miller J. Patterns of early visual field loss in open-angle glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 1987; 103: 512–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bach M, Pfeiffer N, Birkner-Binder D. Pattern-electroretinogram reflects diffuse retinal damage in early glaucoma. Clin Vision Sci 1992; 7: 335–40.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universitäts-AugenklinikFreiburgGermany
  2. 2.Universitäts-AugenklinikWürzburgGermany

Personalised recommendations