Advertisement

The effect of bleach duration and age on the ERG photostress test

  • Ashley Wood
  • Tom Margrain
  • Alison BinnsEmail author
Miscellaneous

Abstract

Background

The ERG photostress test assesses the recovery of the focal 41 Hz ERG following exposure to a bright light that bleaches a significant proportion of photopigment. The aims of this study were: 1) to compare the repeatability of the ERG photostress test recovery time constant following long and short duration light exposure, and 2) to determine the effect of age on the ERG photostress test recovery time constant.

Methods

Focal 41 Hz ERGs were recorded from 23 participants (age range 20–71 years) at 20-second intervals for 5 minutes following either a short-duration (photoflash) or long-duration (equilibrium) light exposure. After a 5-minute wash-out period, the procedure was repeated using the second bleach modality. The time constant of cone recovery was determined by fitting an exponential model to the amplitude recovery data. The whole procedure was repeated on a second occasion. The co-efficient of repeatability (CoR) was calculated for each bleaching technique. The relationship between the time constant of recovery and age was investigated (Pearson’s correlation coefficient).

Results

The time constant of recovery following an equilibrium bleach was more repeatable than recovery following a photoflash (CoR = 85s and 184s respectively). Eight trials (from seven participants) failed to show a reduction in amplitude following the photoflash, suggesting that a blink or fixation loss had occurred. All participants were reliably light-adapted by the equilibrium bleach. For the equilibrium bleach data, the time constant of recovery increased with age at a rate of 27 seconds per decade.

Conclusions

The equilibrium bleach was more reliable and repeatable than the photoflash. Increasing participant age was shown to result in a lengthening of the recovery time constant, of a magnitude comparable to previously published psychophysical data.

Keywords

Electroretinogram, ERG Cone adaptation Repeatability Age-related macular degeneration 

References

  1. 1.
    Binns AM, Margrain TH (2005) Evaluation of retinal function using the Dynamic Focal Cone ERG. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 25:492–500PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Binns AM, Margrain TH (2007) Evaluating retinal function in age-related maculopathy with the ERG photostress test. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 48:2806–2813Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hollins M, Alpern M (1973) Dark adaptation and visual pigment regeneration in human cones. J Gen Physiol 62:430–447PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Coile DC, Baker HD (1992) Foveal dark adaptation, photopigment regeneration, and aging. Vis Neurosci 8:27–39PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Aldebasi YH, Drasdo N, North RV, Morgan JE (2001) The pattern electroretinogram (PERG) with contralateral corneal reference. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 21:243–246PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Paupoo AA, Mahroo OA, Friedburg C, Lamb TD (2000) Human cone photoreceptor responses measured by the electroretinogram [correction of electoretinogram] a-wave during and after exposure to intense illumination. J Physiol 529(Pt 2):469–482PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rushton WAH, Henry GH (1968) Bleaching and regeneration of cone pigments in man. Vision Res 8:617–631PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    BSI (2007) Ophthalmic Instruments — fundamental requirements and test methods. Part 2 — Light Hazard Protection. British Standards Institute BS EN 15004-2Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lamb TD, Pugh EN Jr (2004) Dark adaptation and the retinoid cycle of vision. Prog Retin Eye Res 23:307–380PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mata NL, Radu RA, Clemmons RC, Travis GH (2002) Isomerization and oxidation of vitamin a in cone-dominant retinas: a novel pathway for visual-pigment regeneration in daylight. Neuron 36:69–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jackson GR, Owsley C, McGwinJr G (1999) Aging and dark adaptation. Vision Res 39:3975–3982PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Newsome DA, Negreiro M (2009) Reproducible measurement of macular light flash recovery time using a novel device can indicate the presence and worsening of macular diseases. Curr Eye Res 34:162–170PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sarks SH (1976) Ageing and degeneration in the macular region: a clinico-pathological study. Br J Ophthalmol 60:324–341PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Steinmetz RL, Haimovici R, Jubb C, Fitzke FW, Bird AC (1993) Symptomatic abnormalities of dark adaptation in patients with age-related Bruch's membrane change. Br J Ophthalmol 77:549–554PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Owsley C, Jackson GR, White M, Feist R, Edwards D (2001) Delays in rod-mediated dark adaptation in early age-related maculopathy. Ophthalmology 108:1196–1202PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Owsley C, McGwin G Jr, Jackson GR, Kallies K, Clark M (2007) Cone- and rod-mediated dark adaptation impairment in age-related maculopathy. Ophthalmology 114:1728–1735PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dimitrov PN, Guymer RH, Zele AJ, Anderson AJ, Vingrys AJ (2008) Measuring rod and cone dynamics in age-related maculopathy. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 49:55–65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Optometry and Vision SciencesCardiff UniversityCathays, CardiffUK

Personalised recommendations