Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Can central hexagon peak latency provide a clue to fixation within the mfERG

  • Original research article
  • Published:
Documenta Ophthalmologica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The mfERG has proven to be a useful tool in determining central retinal and macular function. It is, however, reliant on good subject co-operation and fixation. This cannot always be guaranteed due to visual impairment or poor co-operation. Whilst a change in fixation is easy to identify with camera monitoring of the subject, a small eccentric fixation can be difficult to notice or quantify. Whilst the problem of fixation can be obviated by stimulating the retina directly with SLO (Scanning Laser Ophthalmoscope), this is expensive and a certain amount of expertize in optics is required to properly stimulate the retina. In this study, peak latency of response was investigated to see whether it changed across the retina and whether this measure could be used to help assess fixation. Eighteen normal eyes were stimulated using a 60 Hz CRT monitor with only 2 hexagons, one central and one peripheral. These hexagons were presented at three stimulation rates, fast (no filler frames between steps of the m-sequence) and slow (4 and 7 black filler frames between each step of the m-sequence), under all conditions significantly increased central hexagon latencies were noted. In a smaller experiment with 19 hexagons and only 4 subjects, it was noted a significant delay in latency was observed in ring 1 compared to ring 2 and 3 with central fixation, but not when the subjects fixed mid-peripheral and in the periphery to slow stimulation, showing that the central hexagon response was only delayed in the central hexagon when there was adequate fixation. This study suggests that latency could provide a clue to fixation particular at slow rates thereby improving the quality and confidence of recordings made clinically.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Osterberg G (1935) Topography of the layer of rods and cones in the human retina. Acta Ophthalmologica 13:11–96

    Google Scholar 

  2. Curcio CA, Sloan KR, Kalina RE, Hendrickson AE (1990) Human photoreceptor topography. J Comp Neurol 292:497–523

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Holder GE (1987) Significance of abnormal pattern electroretinography in anterior visual pathway dysfunction. Br J Ophthalmol 71:166–171

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Miyake Y, Awaya S (1984) Stimulus deprivation amblyopia: simultaneous recording of local macular electroretinogram and visual evoked response. Arch Ophthalmol 102:998–1003

    Google Scholar 

  5. Sandberg MA, Jacobson SG, Berson EL (1979) Foveal cone electroretinograms in retinitis pigmentosa and juvenile macular degeneration. Am J Ophthalmol 88:702–707

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sutter EE (1991) The fast m-transform: a fast computation of cross-correlations with binary m-sequences. Soci Indus Appl Math J Comput 20:686–694

    Google Scholar 

  7. Sutter EE, Tran D (1992) The field topography of ERG components in man-I. The photopic luminance response. Vis Res 32:433–446

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sutter EE (1985) Multi-input VER and ERG analysis for objective perimetry. Proceedings of the seventh annual conference of engineering and medical society pp 414–419

  9. Lai TYY, Chan WM, Lai RYK, Ngai JWS, Li H, Lam DSC (2007) The clinical applications of multifocal electroretinography: a systematic review. Surv Ophthalmol 52:61–96

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dolan FM, Parks S, Hammer H, Keating D (2002) The wide field electroretinogram reveals retinal dysfunction in early retinitis pigmentosa. Br J Ophthalmol 86:480–481

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Seiple W, Clemens CJ, Greenstein VC, Carr RE, Holopigian K (2004) Test-retest reliability of the multifocal electroretinogram and Humphrey visual fields patients with retinitis pigmentosa. Doc Ophthalmol 109:255–272

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. McDonagh J, Stephen LJ, Dolan FM, Parks S, Dutton GN, Kelly K, Keating D, Sills GJ, Brodie MJ (2003) Peripheral retinal dysfunction in patients taking vigabatrin. Neurology 61:1690–1694

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bultmann S, Rohrschneider K (2002) Reproducibility of multifocal ERG using the scanning laser ophthalmoscope. Graefe’s Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 240:841–845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Rudolph G, Kalpadakis P, Ehrt O, Berninger T, Kampik A (2003) Scanning laser ophthalmoscope multifocal elecetroretinography and microperimetry in patients with Stargardt’s disease. Ophthalmologe 100:720–726

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rudolph G, Kalpadakis P (2003) Topographic mapping of retinal function with the SLO-mfERG under simultaneous control of fixation in Best’s disease. Ophthalmologica 217:154–159

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Nagatomo A, Nao-i N, Maruiwa F, Arai M, Sawada A (1998) Multifocal electroretinograms in normal subjects. pp 129–135

  17. Schimitzek T, Bach M (2006) The influence of luminance on the multifocal ERG. Doc Ophthalmol 113:187–192

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hood DC, Seiple W, Holopigian K, Greenstein VC (1997) A comparison of the components of the multifocal and full-field ERGs. Vis Neurosci 14:533–544

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bock M, Andrassi M, Belitsky L, Lorenz B (1999) A comparsion of two multifocal ERG systems. Doc Ophthalmol 97:157–178

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Rangaswamy NV, Hood DC, Frishman LJ (2003) Regional variations in local contributions to the primate photopic flash ERG: revealed using the slow-sequence mfERG. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 44:3233–3247

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Boycott BB, Hopkins JM, Sperling HG (1987) Cone connections of the horizontal cells of the rhesus monkey’s retina. Proc R Soc 229:345–379

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Perry VH, Cowey A (1988) The length of the fibers of Henle in the retina of macaque monkeys: implications for vision. Neurosci 25:225–236

    Google Scholar 

  23. Schein SJ (1988) Anatomy of macuque fovea and spatial densities of neurons in foveal representation. J Comp Neurol 1988:479–505

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. P. Hagan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hagan, R.P., Small, A., Fisher, A.C. et al. Can central hexagon peak latency provide a clue to fixation within the mfERG. Doc Ophthalmol 120, 159–164 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-009-9206-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-009-9206-5

Keywords

Navigation