Check size tuning of the pattern electroretingoram: a reappraisal
- 54 Downloads
The pattern electroretinogram was recorded to checkerboard stimuli with a wide range of check sizes and two stimulus field sizes. Check sizes ranged from 0.25° to 7° (field size, 16°×14°) and 0.25° to 15° (field size, 32°×27°) in 14 and seven subjects, respectively. Reversal rate was 4.5/s. For minimal intrusion of blink artifacts the interrupted stimulation technique was employed. The P50 and N95 components of the pattern electroretinogram were evaluated separately. With both stimulus field sizes amplitude of P50 and N95 was maximal between 0.75° and 1°. With smaller check sizes the amplitude dropped monotonically. With larger check sizes field size played a role: with the 16°×14° field, P50 gradually dropped to 89% from 1° to 7°, which was paralleled by N95 only up to 7°, where N95 dropped to 81% (p<0.05). With the 32°×27° field, there was no significant difference in size dependency between P50 and N95 for large checks, both components staying constant from 1° to 15° We conclude that there is only minor large-check attenuation of the pattern electroretinogram, especially with a large field. The apparent field-size dependency may explain previous discrepancies in the literature.
Key wordsCheck-size Pattern ERG PERG Spatial frequency Tuning
Iow-spatial frequency attenuation
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 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
- 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
- 9.Riemslag FCC, Ringo JL, Spekreijse H, Verduyn Lunel H. The distinction between luminance and spatial contrast components in the pattern ERG. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser 1983; 37: 255–64.Google Scholar
- 18.Vaegan, Arden GB, Hogg CR. Properties of normal electroretinograms evoked by parterned stimuli in man. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser 1982; 31: 111–29.Google Scholar
- 24.Holder GE. Pattern ERG abnormalities in anterior visual pathway disease. Electroencephalog Clin Neurophysiol 1985; 61: S 135.Google Scholar
- 30.Holder GE. Pattern electroretinography in the evaluation of glaucoma and in optic nerve function. In: Heckenlively JR, Arden GB (eds.) Principles and practice of clinical electrophysiology of vision. St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book, 1991; 549–56.Google Scholar
- 31.Mauguiere F, Holder GE, Luxon LM, Pottinger R. Evoked potentials: abnormal wave-forms and diagnostic yield of evoked potentials. In: Osselton J, Binnie CD, Cooper R, Fowler CJ, Mauguiere F, Prior PF, (eds.) Clinical neurophysiology: EMG, nerve conduction and evoked potentials. Oxford: Butterworth-Heine 1995: 431–81.Google Scholar
- 34.Holder GE. Recording the pattern electroretinogram with the Arden gold foil electrode. J Electrophysiol Technol 1988; 14: 183–90.Google Scholar
- 35.Odom JV, Holder GE, Feghali JG, Cavender S. Pattern electroretinogram intrasession reliability: a two center comparison. Clin Vis Sci 1992; 7: 263–282.Google Scholar
- 38.Marmor M, Holder GE, Porciatti V, Trick GL Zrenner E. ISCEV PERG guidelines. Doc Ophthalml. In press.Google Scholar