Impact of regional retinal responses on cortical visually evoked responses: Multifocal ERGs and VEPs in the retinitis pigmentosa model

Parisi, Vincenzo; Ziccardi, Lucia; Stifano, G.; Montrone, L.; Gallinaro, Geltrude; Falsini, Benedetto

doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2009.09.032

Cited by 32 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These differences are enough to be detected by mean of the statistically significant increment observed in the slope of the fits. This increasing disability of cones with eccentricity is well known in typical RP and has been recently described as a result of a neural reorder occurring in the postreceptoral pathways after the local retinal dysfunction [18][19][20][21]. It is interesting to remark that, as happened with rod response in Figure 2, in Figure 3 slopes of linear fits for TRP3 and CRD patients are very similar to those measured for the control group.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 59%

Small-field perimetry applied to different types of retinitis pigmentosa: preliminary results

Gloriani¹,

Arranz²,

Matesanz³

et al. 2017

New Front Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To measure the sensitivity of small retinal areas by reducing the influence of the adaptation state of the rest of the retina. To assess the functional behaviour of the retina of several patients affected by different types of retinitis pigmentosa (RP).Methods: A prospective study was performed. Five eyes of patients with retinal diseases and different genetic mutations were studied at the University of Valladolid: three typical RP, one cone rod dystrophy (CRD) and one Bardet-Biedl syndrome (BBS). One of the RP patients was analysed again 18 months after the first measurements. A two-maxwellian view optical arrangement was used to measure the luminance thresholds of retinal areas 1 deg sized under dark and low photopic adaptation conditions. Linear regression fits of these thresholds vs. eccentricity were used to compare the patients' sensitivity with the control group. Results:The slopes of the linear fits of the other typical RP patients were higher than those of the control group. The parameters of the linear fits of the RP patient measured twice changed significantly with time. Conclusions:The designed psychophysical method provides, in all cases, coherent results with the expected ones according to the genetic mutation of the patients. The technique seems to be very sensitive to changes in the retinal response. It can be easily incorporated as a technical complement to the traditional perimetry.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 59%

Small-field perimetry applied to different types of retinitis pigmentosa: preliminary results

Gloriani¹,

Arranz²,

Matesanz³

et al. 2017

New Front Ophthalmol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…P1p has been associated with cone activity in previous ERP studies employing different tasks (Parisi et al 2010;Rudvin and Valberg 2006; but see Cohn and Hurley 1985). Posterior P2 has been also reported to be sensitive to photoreceptor activity (Cohn and Hurley 1985;Rudvin and Valberg 2006).…”

Section: P3omentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, certain ERP components are reliable indices of exogenous attention, such as the posterior P1 (P1p) or the anterior P2 (P2a), both showing enhanced amplitude in response to stimuli capturing exogenous attention (see a review in Carretié 2014). Second, visual ERPs have shown sensitivity, from ≈100 to ≈400 ms (this includes P1p and P2a), to photoreceptor activity (Cohn and Hurley 1985;Parisi et al 2010;Rudvin and Valberg 2006), to parvo-vs. magnocellular activity (Ellemberg et al 2001;Hammarrenger et al 2007) and, importantly, to the ambient light modulation of visual perception of discrete (non-emotional) visual stimuli (Münch et al 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ambient Light Modulation of Exogenous Attention to Threat

Carretié

Ruiz-Padial

2016

Brain Topogr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Esta es la versión de autor del artículo publicado en: This is an author produced version of a paper published in: El acceso a la versión del editor puede requerir la suscripción del recurso Access to the published version may require subscription AcknowledgementsThis research was supported by the grants PSI2014-54853-P and PSI2012-37090 from the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad of Spain (MINECO).2 Abstract Planet Earth's motion yields a 50% day -50% night yearly balance in every latitude or longitude, so survival must be guaranteed in very different light conditions in many species, including human. Cone-and rod-dominant vision, respectively specialized in light and darkness, present several processing differences, which are-at least partiallyreflected in event-related potentials (ERPs). The present experiment aimed at characterizing exogenous attention to threatening (spiders) and neutral (wheels) distractors in two environmental light conditions, low mesopic (L, 0.03 lux) and high mesopic (H, 6.5 lux), yielding a differential photoreceptor activity balance: rod>cone and rod

show abstract

“…19 Moreover, while FERG allows the electrophysiological evaluation of preganglionic elements in response to luminance stimuli presented in a restricted part of the central retina (4-9 retinal degrees), 1,2,20 the mfERG technique is useful for assessing responses of several different retinal areas enclosed between 18 and 208 of eccentricity from the fovea. [21][22][23] In fact, while the FERG recording collects the contribution from the entire macular region, mfERG ring analysis allows separating selective measures of bioelectrical responses obtained from localized macular areas. 22,23 This means that recording mfERG, testing visual acuity, and performing automated visual field analysis make it possible to explore the entire central retina and, through appropriate data analysis, to receive selective information regarding the function of localized retinal regions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[21][22][23] In fact, while the FERG recording collects the contribution from the entire macular region, mfERG ring analysis allows separating selective measures of bioelectrical responses obtained from localized macular areas. 22,23 This means that recording mfERG, testing visual acuity, and performing automated visual field analysis make it possible to explore the entire central retina and, through appropriate data analysis, to receive selective information regarding the function of localized retinal regions. [22][23][24] A kernel analysis applied to mfERG responses can be used to assess nonlinear functions of the visual system.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Macular Function in Eyes with Open-Angle Glaucoma Evaluated by Multifocal Electroretinogram

Parisi

Ziccardi

Centofanti³

et al. 2012

Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE. To evaluate macular function in patients with openangle glaucoma (OAG) by means of multifocal electroretinogram (mfERG).METHODS. Twenty-four OAG patients (mean age 54.6 6 9.1 years) and 14 age-similar controls were enrolled. OAG patients had intraocular pressure (IOP) less than 18 mm Hg with topical medical treatment, 24-2 visual field (Humphrey Field Analyzer [HFA]) with mean deviation (MD) between À2 and À12 dB, and corrected pattern standard deviation (CPSD) between þ2 and þ10 dB and no history or presence of cataract and/or macular disease. MfERGs in response to 61 M-stimuli presented to the central 208 of the visual field were assessed in OAG patients (24 eyes) and in controls (14 eyes). Ring (R) analysis was performed every five retinal eccentricities in areas between the fovea and midperiphery: 08 to 2.58 (R1), 2.58 to 58 (R2), 58 to 108 (R3), 108 to 158 (R4), and 158 to 208 (R5). MfERG response amplitude density of the N1-P1 components (N1-P1 RAD, nV/deg 2 ) and P1 implicit time (P1 IT, ms) of the firstorder binary kernel were measured for each ring.RESULTS. OAG patients showed a significant (P < 0.01) decrease in N1-P1 RADs and an increase in P1 IT in both R1 and R2 with respect to controls. The reduction in N1-P1 RADs was significantly (P < 0.01) correlated with HFA MD and CPSD. No other significant differences between OAG and controls were found.CONCLUSIONS. OAG patients show macular dysfunction detectable by the mfERG technique. Since the mfERG N1-P1 component is thought to be generated by preganglionic elements (photoreceptors and OFF bipolar cells), our data support the functional impairment of the neural generators of the macular region in patients with glaucoma. (Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53:6973-6980)

show abstract

Impact of regional retinal responses on cortical visually evoked responses: Multifocal ERGs and VEPs in the retinitis pigmentosa model

Cited by 32 publications

References 18 publications

Small-field perimetry applied to different types of retinitis pigmentosa: preliminary results

Small-field perimetry applied to different types of retinitis pigmentosa: preliminary results

Ambient Light Modulation of Exogenous Attention to Threat

Macular Function in Eyes with Open-Angle Glaucoma Evaluated by Multifocal Electroretinogram

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About