Cargando…

Constant luminance (cd·s/m(2)) versus constant retinal illuminance (Td·s) stimulation in flicker ERGs

PURPOSE: To compare the effect of variable pupil size on the flicker electroretinogram (ERG) between a stimulus having constant luminance and a stimulus having constant retinal illuminance (constant Troland) that compensates for pupil size. METHODS: Subjects (n = 18) were tested with 12 pairs of the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Davis, C. Quentin, Kraszewska, Olga, Manning, Colette
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5364250/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28160194
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10633-017-9572-3
_version_ 1782517288439644160
author Davis, C. Quentin
Kraszewska, Olga
Manning, Colette
author_facet Davis, C. Quentin
Kraszewska, Olga
Manning, Colette
author_sort Davis, C. Quentin
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To compare the effect of variable pupil size on the flicker electroretinogram (ERG) between a stimulus having constant luminance and a stimulus having constant retinal illuminance (constant Troland) that compensates for pupil size. METHODS: Subjects (n = 18) were tested with 12 pairs of the stimuli. The stimulus pair consisted of the ISCEV standard constant luminance stimulus (3 cd·s/m(2) with a 30 cd/m(2) background) and a constant retinal illuminance stimulus (32 Td·s with a 320 Td background) selected to provide the same stimulus and background when the pupil diameter is 3.7 mm. Half the subjects were artificially dilated, and their response was measured before and during the dilation. The natural pupil group was used to assess intra- and inter-subject variability. The artificially dilated group was used to measure the flicker ERG’s dependence on pupil size. RESULTS: With natural pupils, intra-subject variability was lower with the constant Troland stimulus, while inter-subject variability was similar between stimuli. During pupil dilation, the constant Troland stimulus did not have a dependence on pupil size up to 6.3 mm and had slightly larger amplitudes with longer implicit times for fully dilated pupils. For the constant luminance stimulus, waveform amplitudes varied by 22% per mm change in pupil diameter, or by 48% over the 2.2 mm diameter range measured in dilated pupil size. There was no difference in inter-subject variability between constant Troland natural pupils and the same subjects with a constant luminance stimulus when dilated (i.e., the ISCEV standard condition). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that a constant Troland flicker ERG test with natural pupils may be advantageous in clinical testing. Because of its insensitivity to pupil size, constant Troland stimuli should produce smaller reference ranges, which in turn should improve the sensitivity for detection of abnormalities and for monitoring changes. In addition, the test can be administered more efficiently as it does not require artificial dilation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02466607).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5364250
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53642502017-04-07 Constant luminance (cd·s/m(2)) versus constant retinal illuminance (Td·s) stimulation in flicker ERGs Davis, C. Quentin Kraszewska, Olga Manning, Colette Doc Ophthalmol Original Research Article PURPOSE: To compare the effect of variable pupil size on the flicker electroretinogram (ERG) between a stimulus having constant luminance and a stimulus having constant retinal illuminance (constant Troland) that compensates for pupil size. METHODS: Subjects (n = 18) were tested with 12 pairs of the stimuli. The stimulus pair consisted of the ISCEV standard constant luminance stimulus (3 cd·s/m(2) with a 30 cd/m(2) background) and a constant retinal illuminance stimulus (32 Td·s with a 320 Td background) selected to provide the same stimulus and background when the pupil diameter is 3.7 mm. Half the subjects were artificially dilated, and their response was measured before and during the dilation. The natural pupil group was used to assess intra- and inter-subject variability. The artificially dilated group was used to measure the flicker ERG’s dependence on pupil size. RESULTS: With natural pupils, intra-subject variability was lower with the constant Troland stimulus, while inter-subject variability was similar between stimuli. During pupil dilation, the constant Troland stimulus did not have a dependence on pupil size up to 6.3 mm and had slightly larger amplitudes with longer implicit times for fully dilated pupils. For the constant luminance stimulus, waveform amplitudes varied by 22% per mm change in pupil diameter, or by 48% over the 2.2 mm diameter range measured in dilated pupil size. There was no difference in inter-subject variability between constant Troland natural pupils and the same subjects with a constant luminance stimulus when dilated (i.e., the ISCEV standard condition). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that a constant Troland flicker ERG test with natural pupils may be advantageous in clinical testing. Because of its insensitivity to pupil size, constant Troland stimuli should produce smaller reference ranges, which in turn should improve the sensitivity for detection of abnormalities and for monitoring changes. In addition, the test can be administered more efficiently as it does not require artificial dilation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02466607). Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2017-02-03 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5364250/ /pubmed/28160194 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10633-017-9572-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Davis, C. Quentin
Kraszewska, Olga
Manning, Colette
Constant luminance (cd·s/m(2)) versus constant retinal illuminance (Td·s) stimulation in flicker ERGs
title Constant luminance (cd·s/m(2)) versus constant retinal illuminance (Td·s) stimulation in flicker ERGs
title_full Constant luminance (cd·s/m(2)) versus constant retinal illuminance (Td·s) stimulation in flicker ERGs
title_fullStr Constant luminance (cd·s/m(2)) versus constant retinal illuminance (Td·s) stimulation in flicker ERGs
title_full_unstemmed Constant luminance (cd·s/m(2)) versus constant retinal illuminance (Td·s) stimulation in flicker ERGs
title_short Constant luminance (cd·s/m(2)) versus constant retinal illuminance (Td·s) stimulation in flicker ERGs
title_sort constant luminance (cd·s/m(2)) versus constant retinal illuminance (td·s) stimulation in flicker ergs
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5364250/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28160194
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10633-017-9572-3
work_keys_str_mv AT daviscquentin constantluminancecdsm2versusconstantretinalilluminancetdsstimulationinflickerergs
AT kraszewskaolga constantluminancecdsm2versusconstantretinalilluminancetdsstimulationinflickerergs
AT manningcolette constantluminancecdsm2versusconstantretinalilluminancetdsstimulationinflickerergs