Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2003 Oct;87(10):1268-71.
doi: 10.1136/bjo.87.10.1268.

Interocular amplitude differences of the full field electroretinogram in normal subjects

Y Rotenstreich  1 , G A Fishman, R J Anderson, D G Birch
Affiliations

Interocular amplitude differences of the full field electroretinogram in normal subjects

Y Rotenstreich et al. Br J Ophthalmol. 2003 Oct.

Abstract

Aims: To determine the interocular amplitude response difference of the electroretinogram (ERG) in normal subjects.

Methods: 79 subjects, without retinal changes of clinical significance, underwent ERG testing. They included 63 men and 16 women, with a mean age of 44 (SD 12) years and range of 18-65 years. Isolated rod, scotopic maximal, dark adapted 30 Hz flicker, photopic single flash, and light adapted 30 Hz flicker responses were recorded in both eyes following the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision (ISCEV) standard protocol. The interocular percentage differences of the ERG b-wave amplitudes were calculated and presented as percentiles (25th, 50th, 75th, 95th), means (SD), and medians.

Results: The median interocular percentage differences in the b-wave amplitudes for the above ERG stimulus responses were 10%, 8%, 10%, 11%, and 10%, respectively. The mean interocular percentage differences were 11%, 11%, 12%, 13%, and 14%. The 95th percentiles for the interocular percentage differences were 28%, 27%, 36%, 33%, and 35%, respectively.

Conclusions: The interocular percentage differences in the ERG b-wave amplitudes for five different stimulus responses were similar in our cohort of individuals without clinically significant retinal changes and ranged from a median of 8-11% and a 95th percentile of 27-36%. Our findings should be useful for determining sample sizes in future therapeutic trials on retinal diseases with monocular therapeutic strategies and may also have application for the more accurate detection of asymmetric retinal disease.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The columns represent the interocular percentage difference distribution in 5% intervals of the ERG b-wave amplitude responses for the single flash photopic stimulus. The line demonstrates the cumulative curve for this stimulus in 5% difference increment steps.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The columns represent the interocular percentage difference distribution in 5% intervals of the ERG b-wave amplitude responses for the light adapted 30 Hz flicker stimulus. The line demonstrates the cumulative curve for this stimulus in 5% difference increment steps.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The columns represent the interocular percentage difference distribution in 5% intervals of the ERG b-wave amplitude responses for the scotopic isolated rod stimulus. The line demonstrates the cumulative curve for this stimulus in 5% difference increment steps.
Figure 4
Figure 4
The columns represent the interocular percentage difference distribution in 5% intervals of the ERG b-wave amplitude responses for the scotopic maximal stimulus. The line demonstrates the cumulative curve for this stimulus in 5% difference increment steps.
Figure 5
Figure 5
The columns represent the interocular percentage difference distribution in 5% intervals of the ERG b-wave amplitude responses for the dark adapted 30 Hz flicker stimulus. The line demonstrates the cumulative curve for this stimulus in 5% difference increment steps.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Marmor MF, Zrenner E. Standard for clinical electroretinography (1999 update). International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision. Doc Ophthalmol 1998–99;97:143–56. - PubMed
    1. Ayres LM, Caruso RC, Lopez P, et al. Diagnostic significance of interocular differences in ganzfeld electroretinogram (ERG) amplitude. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1998;39:B235, S972.
    1. Fishman GA, Birch DG, Holder GE, et al. Electrophysiologic testing in disorders of the retina, optic nerve, and visual pathway. 2nd ed. San Francisco: The Foundation of the American Academy of Ophthalmology, 2001:10–11.
    1. Jacobson SG, Morales DS, Sun XK, et al. Pattern of retinal dysfunction in acute zonal occult outer retinopathy. Ophthalmology 1995;102:1187–98. - PubMed
    1. Jacobson SG, Yagasaki K, Feuer WJ, et al. Interocular asymmetry of visual function in heterozygotes of X-linked retinitis pigmentosa. Exp Eye Res 1989;48:679–91. - PubMed