Alterations of Photopic Negative Response of Multifocal Electroretinogram in Patients with Glaucoma

Abstract

These results suggest that the N2 component of the slow-sequence mfERGs is affected by glaucoma in the central retinal area. Regional variations in the contribution of the retinal ganglion cell activity to the N2 should be considered when examining the mfERGs in glaucoma patients.

Comparison of photopic negative response (PhNR) between focal macular and full-field electroretinograms in monkeys

“…The observed differences between the focal macular and full-field PhNRs indicate that functional contribution of the inner retina including the RGCs is greater in the focal macular ERG than in the full-field ERG in monkeys. Therefore, our results support the idea that the PhNR elicited from the macula is advantageous for detection of macular RGC dysfunction, consistent with recent studies [14,20].…”

Photopic Negative Response Obtained Using a Handheld Electroretinogram Device: Determining the Optimal Measure and Repeatability

“…1–4 As an objective clinical measure of neuroretinal function, this component has been used primarily to evaluate eyes with glaucoma, 5–13 although studies have also investigated its changes in retinal vascular diseases, 14–16 conditions causing optic atrophy, 17–21 and following vitreoretinal surgery. 22 Despite its potential clinical use for these conditions, a major impediment to its widespread and routine application is the difficulty of its implementation in clinical settings and its large magnitude of measurement variability.…”

Comparing three different modes of electroretinography in experimental glaucoma: diagnostic performance and correlation to structure

“…The three modes selected were mfERG, ff-ERG and PERG because they have each been evaluated extensively and proven effective in clinical studies of human glaucoma [19,21,13,14,22,23,20,24,15] as well as in previous laboratory studies in NHP eyes after retinal ganglion cell or optic nerve injury [34,28], including EG [35–39,17,40,41,29–31]. To our knowledge, however, no prior study has compared all three modes in the same cohort of glaucomatous eyes.…”

“…It has been suggested that the mfERG N2 component is analogous to the PhNR of the ff-ERG [Viswanathan S, et al IOVS 2009;50: ARVO E-Abstract 4758], which in turn may share retinal generators with the PERG N95 [38,56]. Thus it is not surprising that the mfERG N2 appears to reflect glaucomatous damage [23,57,58]. Significant reduction of LFC amplitudes in mfERG responses to a more complicated stimulus have also been reported in NHP EG [41], which might reflect a similar underlying functional abnormality.…”

“…It is possible that limiting the stimulus to localized areas of the macula [67–69,62,23] and/or to a narrower spectral range (with a goal of stronger chromatic contrast) [43] might offer greater improvement of diagnostic performance of the PhNR as compared to the conditions used in this study. Meanwhile, there were substantial effects related to the derivation of PhNR amplitude alone (see Appendix), which are worth considering with/or without other methodological changes.…”