Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Wood, Ashley; Margrain, Thomas; Binns, Alison Mary (2014)
Publisher: Public Library of Science
Journal: PLoS ONE
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Research Article, Diagnostic Medicine, Signal Processing, Mathematics, Research Design, Engineering and Technology, Physical Sciences, Ophthalmology, Biostatistics, Statistical Signal Processing, Statistics (Mathematics), Biology and Life Sciences, Macular Disorders, Research and Analysis Methods, Clinical Research Design, Physiology, Medicine, Q, R, RE, Geriatric Ophthalmology, Electrophysiology, Science, Retinal Disorders, Medicine and Health Sciences, Statistical Methods

Classified by OpenAIRE into

mesheuropmc: genetic structures, sense organs
The focal cone electroretinogram is a sensitive marker for macular disease, but have we unlocked its full potential? Typically assessment of waveform parameters is subjective and focuses on a small number of locations (e.g. the a-wave). This study evaluated the discriminatory and diagnostic potential of 4 conventional and 15 novel, objectively determined, parameters in patients with early Age-related Macular Degeneration. Focal cone electroretinograms were recorded in 54 participants with early Age-related Macular Degeneration (72.9±8.2 years) and 54 healthy controls (69±7.7 years). Conventional a and b wave amplitudes and implicit times were measured and compared to novel parameters derived from both the 1st and 2nd derivatives and the frequency-domain power spectrum of the electroretinogram.Statistically significant differences between groups were shown for all conventional parameters, the majority of 1st and 2nd derivative parameters and the power spectrum at 25 and 30 Hz. Receiver operating characteristics showed that both conventional and 1st and 2nd derivative implicit times had provided the best diagnostic potential. A regression model showed a small improvement over any individual parameter investigated. The non-conventional parameters enhanced the objective evaluation of the focal electroretinogram, especially when the amplitude was low. Furthermore, the novel parameters described here allow the implicit time of the electroretinogram to be probed at points other than the peaks of the a and b waves. Consequently these novel analysis techniques could prove valuable in future electrophysiological investigation, detection and monitoring of Age-related Macular Degeneration.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. Bunce C, Xing W, Wormald R (2010) Causes of blind and partial sight certifications in England and Wales: April 2007-March 2008. Eye (Lond) 24: 1692-1699. doi:10.1038/eye.2010.122.
    • 2. Chamie J (2005) World population prospects: The 2004 revision. New York United Nations Dep Econ Soc Aff.
    • 3. Wong TY, Wong T, Chakravarthy U, Klein R, Mitchell P, et al. (2008) The natural history and prognosis of neovascular age-related macular degeneration: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology 115: 116- 126. doi:10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.03.008.
    • 4. Bird A (2010) Therapeutic targets in age-related macular disease. J Clin Invest 120: 3033-3041. doi:10.1172/JCI42437.tion.
    • 5. Fowler BJ (2012) Mechanisms of age-related macular degeneration. Neuron 75: 26-39. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2012.06.018.
    • 6. Ambati J, Atkinson JP, Gelfand BD (2013) Immunology of age-related macular degeneration. Nat Rev Immunol 13: 438-451. doi:10.1038/nri3459.
    • 7. Neelam K, Nolan J, Chakravarthy U, Beatty S (2009) Psychophysical function in age-related maculopathy. Surv Ophthalmol 54: 167-210. doi:10.1016/j.survophthal.2008.12.003.
    • 8. Bush RA, Sieving PA (1994) A proximal retinal component in the primate photopic ERG a-wave. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 35: 635-645.
    • 9. Shiells R, Falk G (1999) Contribution of rod, on-bipolar, and horizontal cell light responses to the ERG of dogfish retina. Vis Neurosci 16: 503-511.
    • 10. Bach M, Poloschek CM (2013) Electrophysiology and glaucoma: current status and future challenges. Cell Tissue Res 353: 287-296. doi:10.1007/s00441-013- 1598-6.
    • 11. Hogg RE, Chakravarthy U (2006) Visual function and dysfunction in early and late age-related maculopathy. Prog Retin Eye Res 25: 249-276. doi:10.1016/ j.preteyeres.2005.11.002.
    • 12. Vincent A, Robson AG, Holder GE (2013) Pathognomonic (diagnostic) ERGs. A review and update. Retina 33: 5-12. doi:10.1097/IAE.0b013e31827e2306.
    • 13. Sunness J, Massof R, Johnson M, Finkelstein D, Fine S (1985) Peripheral retinal function in age-related macular degeneration. Arch Ophthalmol 103: 811-816.
    • 14. Walter P, Widder R, Lu¨ ke C, Ko¨nigsfeld P, Brunner R (1999) Electrophysiological abnormalities in age-related macular degeneration. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 237: 962-968.
    • 15. Terasaki H, Miyake Y, Niwa T, Ito Y, Suzuki T, et al. (2002) Focal macular electroretinograms before and after removal of choroidal neovascular lesions. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 43: 1540-1545.
    • 16. Nishihara H, Kondo M, Ishikawa K, Sugita T, Piao C-H, et al. (2008) Focal macular electroretinograms in eyes with wet-type age-related macular degeneration. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 49: 3121-3125. doi:10.1167/ iovs.08-1835.
    • 17. Binns AM, Margrain TH (2007) Evaluating retinal function in age-related maculopathy with the ERG photostress test. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 48: 2806-2813. doi:10.1167/iovs.06-0392.
    • 18. Sandberg M, Miller S, Gaudio A (1993) Foveal cone ERGs in fellow eyes of patients with unilateral neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 34: 3477-3480.
    • 19. Falsini B, Serrao S, Fadda A, Iarossi G, Porrello G, et al. (1999) Focal electroretinograms and fundus appearance in nonexudative age-related macular degeneration. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 237: 193-200. doi:10.1007/ s004170050218.
    • 20. Remulla JF, Gaudio A, Miller S, Sandberg M (1995) Foveal electroretinograms and choroidal perfusion characteristics in fellow eyes of patients with unilateral neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Br J Ophthalmol 79: 558-561.
    • 21. Falsini B, Fadda A, Iarossi G, Piccardi M (2000) Retinal sensitivity to flicker modulation: reduced by early age-related maculopathy. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 41: 1498-1506.
    • 22. Sandberg M, Weiner A, Miller S, Gaudio A (1998) High-risk characteristics of fellow eyes of patients with unilateral neovascular age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 105: 441-447. doi:10.1016/S0161- 6420(98)93025-1.
    • 23. Piccardi M, Ziccardi L, Stifano G, Montrone L, Iarossi G, et al. (2009) Regional cone-mediated dysfunction in age-related maculopathy evaluated by focal electroretinograms: relationship with retinal morphology and perimetric sensitivity. Ophthalmic Res 41: 194-202. doi:10.1159/000217723.
    • 24. Lei B, Perlman I (1999) The contributions of voltage- and time-dependent potassium conductances to the electroretinogram in rabbits. Vis Neurosci 16: 743-754.
    • 25. Granit R (1933) The components of the retinal action potential in mammals and their relation to the discharge in the optic nerve. J Physiol 77: 207-239.
    • 26. Miyake Y (1998) Focal macular electroretinography. Nagoya J Med Sci 61: 79- 84.
    • 27. Paupoo AA, Mahroo OA, Friedburg C, Lamb TD (2000) Human cone photoreceptor responses measured by the electroretinogram a-wave during and after exposure to intense illumination. J Physiol 529: 469-482.
    • 28. Breton ME, Montzka DP (1992) Empiric limits of rod photocurrent component underlying a-wave response in the electroretinogram. Doc Ophthalmol 79: 337- 361.
    • 29. Friedburg C, Thomas MM, Lamb TD (2001) Time course of the flash response of dark- and light-adapted human rod photoreceptors derived from the electroretinogram. J Physiol 534: 217-242.
    • 30. Fulton A, Rushton W (1978) The human rod ERG: correlation with psychophysical responses in light and dark adaptation. Vision Res 18: 793-800.
    • 31. Hood DC, Birch DG (1990) The A-wave of the human electroretinogram and rod receptor function. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 31: 2070-2081.
    • 32. Hood DC, Birch DG (1990) A quantitative measure of the electrical activity of human rod photoreceptors using electroretinography. Vis Neurosci 5: 379-387.
    • 33. Lachapelle P, Molotchnikoff S (1986) Components of the electroretinogram: a reappraisal. Doc Ophthalmol 63: 337-348.
    • 34. Gur M, Zeevi Y (1980) Frequency-domain analysis of the human electroretinogram. J Opt Soc Am 70: 53. doi:10.1364/JOSA.70.000053.
    • 35. Chylack LT Wolfe JK, Singer DM, et al J (1993) The lens opacities classification system III. Arch Ophthalmol 111: 831-836.
    • 36. AREDS (2001) The age-related eye disease study system for classifying agerelated macular degeneration from stereoscopic color fundus photographs: the age-related eye disease study report number 6. Am J Ophthalmol 132: 668-681.
    • 37. Stroud KA (1986) Further Engineering Mathematics. 3rd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
    • 38. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ (1983) A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 148: 839-843.
    • 39. Bland J, Altman D (1995) Multiple significance tests: the Bonferroni method. Br Med J 310: 170.
    • 40. Mortlock KE, Binns AM, Aldebasi YH, North R V (2010) Inter-subject, interocular and inter-session repeatability of the photopic negative response of the electroretinogram recorded using DTL and skin electrodes. Doc Ophthalmol 121: 123-134. doi:10.1007/s10633-010-9239-9.
    • 41. Mentzer AE, Eifler DM, Montiani-Ferreira F, Tuntivanich N, Forcier JQ, et al. (2005) Influence of recording electrode type and reference electrode position on the canine electroretinogram. Doc Ophthalmol 111: 95-106. doi:10.1007/ s10633-005-4517-7.
    • 42. Wali N, Leguire LE (1992) Fundus pigmentation and the dark-adapted electroretinogram. Doc Ophthalmol 80: 1-11. doi:10.1007/BF00161226.
    • 43. Westall C, Dhaliwal H, Panton C, Sigesmun D, Levin A, et al. (2001) Values of electroretinogram responses according to axial length. Doc Ophthalmol 102: 115-130.
    • 44. Asi H, Leibru R, Perlman I (1992) Frequency-domain Analysis Of The Human Corneal Electroretinogram. Clin Vis Sci 7: 9-19.
    • 45. Gerth C (2009) The role of the ERG in the diagnosis and treatment of AgeRelated Macular Degeneration. Doc Ophthalmol 118: 63-68. doi:10.1007/ s10633-008-9133-x.
    • 46. Peachey N, Alexander K, Fishman G (1987) Rod and cone system contributions to oscillatory potentials: an explanation for the conditioning flash effect. Vision Res 27: 859-866.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article