Photopic negative response of full-field and focal macular electroretinograms in patients with optic nerve atrophy

  • Kunifusa Tamada
  • Shigeki Machida
  • Daisuke Yokoyama
  • Daijiro Kurosaka
Clinical Investigation

Abstract

Purpose

To determine alterations of the photopic negative response (PhNR) in the full-field and focal macular electroretinograms (ERGs) of patients with optic nerve atrophy (ONA).

Methods

Ten eyes of eight patients, five women and three men with a mean age of 55.1 years, with ONA were studied. Thirty-six age-matched controls were examined using the same protocol. Full-field cone ERGs were elicited by red stimuli on a blue background, and focal ERGs were elicited by a 15° white stimulus spot centered on the macular region.

Results

The a- and b-wave amplitudes of the full-field and focal ERGs of the affected eyes were similar to those of the control eyes. The full-field PhNR amplitudes were significantly reduced in six of ten affected eyes. Four eyes with normal full-field PhNR amplitudes had central scotomas. The focal PhNR amplitudes were smaller than the normal limits in all affected eyes.

Conclusions

The reduction of the full-field and focal PhNR in eyes with ONA indicates that both originate from the retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) and their axons. The findings also indicate that focal PhNR amplitudes can be used to assess focal damages of both the RGCs and their axons in eyes with ONA.

Keywords

ERG optic nerve atrophy PhNR photopic negative response 

References

  1. 1.
    Spileers W, Reis-Falcao F, Smith R, et al. The human ERG evoked by a Ganzfeld stimulator powered by red and green light emitting diodes. Clin Vis Sci 1993;8:21–39.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Viswanathan S, Frishman LJ, Robson JG, et al. The photopic negative response of the macaque electroretinogram: reduction by experimental glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1999;40:1124–1136.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Narahashi T. Chemicals as tools in the study of excitable membranes. Physiol Rev 1974;54:813–889.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bloomfield SA. Effect of spike blockade on the receptive-field size of amacrine and ganglion cells in the rabbit retina. J Neurophysiol 1996;75:1878–1893.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Viswanathan S, Frishman LJ, Robson JG, et al. The photopic negative response of the flash electroretinogram in primary open angle glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2001;42:514–522.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Machida S, Gotoh Y, Toba Y, et al. Correlation between photopic negative response and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness and optic disc topography in glaucomatous eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2008;49:2201–2207.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gotoh Y, Machida S, Tazawa Y. Selective loss of the photopic negative response in patients with optic nerve atrophy. Arch Ophthalmol 2004;122:341–346.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rangaswamy NV, Frishman LJ, Dorotheo EU, et al. Photopic ERGs in patients with optic neuropathies: comparison with primate ERGs after pharmacological blockade of inner retina. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2004;45:3827–3837.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Miyata K, Nakamura M, Kondo M, et al. Reduction of oscillatory potentials and photopic negative response in patients with autosomal dominant optic atrophy with OPA1 mutations. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2007;48:820–824.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Miyake Y, Yanagida K, Yagasaki K, et al. Subjective scotometry and recording of local electroretinogram and visual evoked response. System with television monitor of the fundus. Jpn J Ophthalmol 1981;25:439–448.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Miyake Y. Studies of local macular ERG. Acta Soc Ophthalmol Jpn 1988;92:1419–1449.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Machida S, Toba Y, Ohtaki A, et al. Photopic negative response of focal electroretinogram in glaucomatous eyes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2008;49:5636–5644.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kondo M, Kurimoto Y, Sakai T, et al. Recording focal macular photopic negative response (PhNR) from monkeys. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2008;49:3544–3550.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kurimoto Y, Kondo M, Ueno S, et al. Asymmetry of focal macular photopic negative responses (PhNRs) in monkeys. Exp Eye Res 2009;88:892–898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rangaswamy NV, Shirato S, Kaneko M, et al. Effects of spectral characteristics of Ganzfeld stimuli on the photopic negative response (PhNR) of the ERG. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2007;48:4818–4828.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nevalainen J, Krapp E, Paetzold J, et al. Visual field defects in acute optic neuritis—distribution of different types of defect pattern, assessed with threshold-related supraliminal perimetry, ensuring high spatial resolution. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2008;246:599–607.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hayreh SS. Posterior ischaemic optic neuropathy: clinical features, pathogenesis, and management. Eye 2004;18:1188–1206.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jacobson DM. Symptomatic compression of the optic nerve by the carotid artery. Ophthalmology 1999;106:1994–2004.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gerling J, Meyer JH, Kommerell G. Visual field defect in optic neuritis and anterior ischemic neuropathy: distinctive features. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 1998;236:188–192.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japanese Ophthalmological Society (JOS) 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kunifusa Tamada
    • 1
  • Shigeki Machida
    • 1
    • 2
  • Daisuke Yokoyama
    • 1
  • Daijiro Kurosaka
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of OphthalmologyIwate Medical University School of MedicineMoriokaJapan
  2. 2.Department of OphthalmologyIwate Medical University School of MedicineMorioka, IwateJapan

Personalised recommendations