A comparison of multifocal ERG and frequency domain OCT changes in patients with abnormalities of the retina.
A comparison of multifocal ERG and frequency domain OCT changes in patients with abnormalities of the retina.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s10633-009-9210-9
复制
发表时间：
2010-04
影响因子：
1.4
通讯作者：
Odel, Jeffrey G.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dale, Elizabeth A.;Hood, Donald C.;Greenstein, Vivienne C.;Odel, Jeffrey G.
比较多焦视网膜电图（mfERG）和频域光学相干断层扫描（fdOCT）检测视网膜异常的能力。共有198只眼睛（100例患者）被神经眼科医生转诊，以排除视力障碍的视网膜病因。所有患者均采用静态自动视野检查（SAP）（Humphrey视野分析仪; Zeiss Meditec）、mfERG（Veris，EDI）和fdOCT（3D-OCT 1000，Topcon）进行评价。使用103个缩放六边形和符合ISCEV标准的程序进行mfERG（Hood DC等人（2008）Doc Ophthalmol 116（1）：1-11）。fdOCT成像包括通过中央凹的水平和垂直线扫描。将局部mfERG和fdOCT异常与SAP测量的视野灵敏度丧失局部区域进行比较，并分类为正常/不确定或异常。146只眼在fdOCT和mfERG上均被归类为正常视网膜。根据mfERG和/或fdOCT，52只眼（36例患者）的视网膜被归类为异常。在该组中，25只眼（20例患者）在两项测试中均异常。然而，20只眼（13例患者）mfERG异常，而fdOCT正常/不确定; 7只眼（7例患者）mfERG正常或不确定，但fdOCT异常。这两种检测视网膜异常的方法之间存在相当大的分歧。mfERG往往会错过fdOCT上可检测到的小的局部异常。另一方面，在mfERG和SAP结果明显异常的情况下，fdOCT可能显示正常。虽然改进的成像和分析在某些情况下可能会显示fdOCT异常，但在其他情况下，早期损伤可能不会出现在结构测试中。
To compare the ability of the multifocal electroretinogram (mfERG) and frequency domain optical coherence tomography (fdOCT) to detect retinal abnormalities. A total of 198 eyes (100 patients) were referred by neuro-ophthalmologists to rule out a retinal etiology of visual impairment. All patients were evaluated with static automated perimetry (SAP) (Humphrey Visual Field Analyzer; Zeiss Meditec), mfERG (Veris, EDI) and fdOCT (3D-OCT 1000, Topcon). The mfERG was performed with 103 scaled hexagons and procedures conforming to ISCEV standards (Hood DC et al. (2008) Doc Ophthalmol 116(1):1–11). The fdOCT imaging included horizontal and vertical line scans through the fovea. Local mfERG and fdOCT abnormalities were compared to local regions of visual field sensitivity loss measured with SAP and categorized as normal/inconclusive or abnormal. 146 eyes were categorized as normal retina on both fdOCT and mfERG. The retina of 52 eyes (36 patients) was categorized as abnormal based upon mfERG and/or fdOCT. Of this group, 25 eyes (20 patients) were abnormal on both tests. However, 20 eyes (13 patients) were abnormal on mfERG, while the fdOCT was normal/inconclusive; and 7 eyes (7 patients) had normal or inconclusive mfERG, but abnormal fdOCT. Considerable disagreement exists between these two methods for detection of retinal abnormalities. The mfERG tends to miss small local abnormalities that are detectable on the fdOCT. On the other hand, the fdOCT can appear normal in the face of clearly abnormal mfERG and SAP results. While improved imaging and analysis may show fdOCT abnormalities in some cases, in others early damage may not appear on structural tests.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
17.8
作者：
Hood, DC
通讯作者：
Hood, DC
影响因子：
0.8
作者：
Petropoulos, I. K.;Desmangles, P. M.;Matter, M. A.
通讯作者：
Matter, M. A.
影响因子：
4.2
作者：
Pierro, L;Tremolada, G;Brancato, R
通讯作者：
Brancato, R
影响因子：
4.1
作者：
Saito, W;Yamamoto, S;Ogata, K
通讯作者：
Ogata, K
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Hood DC;Lin CE;Lazow MA;Locke KG;Zhang X;Birch DG
通讯作者：
Birch DG