Article Text

other Versions

PDF
Original article
Multifocal pattern electroretinography for the detection of neural loss in eyes with permanent temporal hemianopia or quadrantanopia from chiasmal compression
  1. Mário Luiz Ribeiro Monteiro,
  2. Kenzo Hokazono,
  3. Leonardo Provetti Cunha,
  4. Maria Kiyoko Oyamada
  1. Division of Ophthalmology, Hospital das Clínicas of the University of São Paulo Medical School, São Paulo, Brazil
  1. Correspondence to Dr Mário Luiz Ribeiro Monteiro, Av Angélica 1757 conj 61, 01227-200, São Paulo, SP, Brazil; mlrmonteiro{at}usp.com.br

Aims To evaluate the ability of multifocal transient pattern electroretinography (mfPERG) to detect neural loss and assess the relationship between mfPERG and visual-field (VF) loss in eyes with chiasmal compression.

Methods 23 eyes from 23 patients with temporal VF defects and band atrophy of the optic nerve and 21 controls underwent standard automated perimetry and mfPERG using a stimulus pattern of 19 rectangles, each consisting of 12 squares. The response was determined for the central rectangle, for the nasal and temporal hemifields (eight rectangles each) and for each quadrant (three rectangles) in both patients and controls. Comparisons were made using variance analysis. Correlations between VF and mfPERG measurements were verified by linear regression analysis.

Results Mean±SD mfPERG amplitudes from the temporal hemifield (0.50±0.17 and 0.62±0.32) and temporal quadrants (superior 0.42±0.21 and 0.52±0.35, inferior 0.51±0.23 and 0.74±0.40) were significantly lower in eyes with band atrophy than in controls (0.78±0.24, 0.89±0.28, 0.73±0.26, 0.96±0.36, 0.79±0.26 and 0.91±0.31, respectively). No significant difference was observed in nasal hemifield measurements. Significant correlations (0.36–0.73) were found between VF relative sensitivity and mfPERG amplitude in different VF sectors.

Conclusions mfPERG amplitude measurements clearly differentiate eyes with temporal VF defect from controls. The good correlation between mfPERG amplitudes and the severity of VF defect suggests that mfPERG may be used as an indicator of ganglion cell dysfunction.

Clinical trial registration number ClinicalTrial.gov identifier number NCT00553761.

  • Multifocal pattern electroretinography
  • temporal hemianopia
  • chiasmal compression
  • band atrophy of the optic nerve
  • optic nerve
  • visual pathway
  • electrophysiology
  • diagnostic tests/investigation
  • field of vision

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Aims To evaluate the ability of multifocal transient pattern electroretinography (mfPERG) to detect neural loss and assess the relationship between mfPERG and visual-field (VF) loss in eyes with chiasmal compression.

Methods 23 eyes from 23 patients with temporal VF defects and band atrophy of the optic nerve and 21 controls underwent standard automated perimetry and mfPERG using a stimulus pattern of 19 rectangles, each consisting of 12 squares. The response was determined for the central rectangle, for the nasal and temporal hemifields (eight rectangles each) and for each quadrant (three rectangles) in both patients and controls. Comparisons were made using variance analysis. Correlations between VF and mfPERG measurements were verified by linear regression analysis.

Results Mean±SD mfPERG amplitudes from the temporal hemifield (0.50±0.17 and 0.62±0.32) and temporal quadrants (superior 0.42±0.21 and 0.52±0.35, inferior 0.51±0.23 and 0.74±0.40) were significantly lower in eyes with band atrophy than in controls (0.78±0.24, 0.89±0.28, 0.73±0.26, 0.96±0.36, 0.79±0.26 and 0.91±0.31, respectively). No significant difference was observed in nasal hemifield measurements. Significant correlations (0.36–0.73) were found between VF relative sensitivity and mfPERG amplitude in different VF sectors.

Conclusions mfPERG amplitude measurements clearly differentiate eyes with temporal VF defect from controls. The good correlation between mfPERG amplitudes and the severity of VF defect suggests that mfPERG may be used as an indicator of ganglion cell dysfunction.

Clinical trial registration number ClinicalTrial.gov identifier number NCT00553761.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Funding Supported by grants from Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, CNPq (No 309709/2007-5 and 479716/2008-0), Brasília, Brazil.

  • Competing interests None.

  • Patient consent Obtained.

  • Ethics approval Ethics approval was provided by the Institutional Review Board Ethics Committee (Comissão de Ética para projetos de pesquisa).

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.