Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2007
Flash electroretinography: normative values with surface skin electrodes and no pupil dilation using a standard stimulation protocol.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Papathanasiou Eleftherios S, Papacostas Savvas S
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate the clinical feasibility of using surface electrodes for recording flash electroretinography (ERG), using the stimulation standards of the International Society for the Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision (ISCEV), without pupillary dilation.
METHODS: Eighteen physiologically normal volunteers were tested. Surface recording electrodes were placed over the middle third of the lower eyelid of each eye, and the reference electrode placed on the temple. The recording filters and method of stimulation for the standard flash cone, 30 Hz flicker, rod, standard combined and oscillatory responses were those recommended by the ISCEV. Four patients with a history of visual dysfunction were also examined.
RESULTS: The amplitudes of the responses were noted to have a high signal to noise ratio, allowing us to average only a few responses. The waveform configurations were almost identical to those published using other recording methods. Patients with retinitis pigmentosa and early onset retinal dystrophy had abnormal responses, whereas patients with Stargardt's Syndrome and spasm of accommodation had responses within normal limits.
CONCLUSIONS: This study has established the clinical feasibility of performing flash ERG using surface skin electrodes, with no pupillary dilation and using the stimulation standards of the ISCEV.
METHODS: Eighteen physiologically normal volunteers were tested. Surface recording electrodes were placed over the middle third of the lower eyelid of each eye, and the reference electrode placed on the temple. The recording filters and method of stimulation for the standard flash cone, 30 Hz flicker, rod, standard combined and oscillatory responses were those recommended by the ISCEV. Four patients with a history of visual dysfunction were also examined.
RESULTS: The amplitudes of the responses were noted to have a high signal to noise ratio, allowing us to average only a few responses. The waveform configurations were almost identical to those published using other recording methods. Patients with retinitis pigmentosa and early onset retinal dystrophy had abnormal responses, whereas patients with Stargardt's Syndrome and spasm of accommodation had responses within normal limits.
CONCLUSIONS: This study has established the clinical feasibility of performing flash ERG using surface skin electrodes, with no pupillary dilation and using the stimulation standards of the ISCEV.