Top

Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology

Published in:

Open Access 06-01-2024 | Glaucoma | Glaucoma

Pattern electroretinogram, blue-yellow visual evoked potentials and the risk of developing visual field defects in glaucoma suspects: a longitudinal “survival” analysis with a very long follow-up

Authors: Cord Huchzermeyer, Robert Lämmer, Christian Y. Mardin, Friedrich E. Kruse, Jan Kremers, Folkert K. Horn

Published in: Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology | Issue 5/2024

Abstract

Purpose

Estimating glaucoma suspects’ risk for visual field defects helps to avoid under- and over-treatment. In this retrospective, longitudinal cohort study with a very long follow-up, we studied whether pattern electroretinograms (PERG) amplitudes and blue-on-yellow visual evoked potential (BY-VEP) latencies can predict visual field defects.

Methods

Participants of the Erlangen Glaucoma Study were examined with PERG and BY-VEP between 9/1991 and 8/2001. Stimuli were created using an optical bench with Maxwellian view and consisted of vertical gratings (0,88 cpd) in a 32° field for both PERG and BY-VEP. Patients were treated according to clinical standards and performed standard automated perimetry (SAP) annually. Retrospectively, patients with normal SAP at baseline were selected. Primary endpoint was conversion to perimetric glaucoma. Predictive value was modeled using Kaplan–Meier analyses and a multivariate cox proportional hazards model with the continuous variables PERG amplitude, BY-VEP peak time and SAP square-root of loss variance (sLV) after stratification for Jonas classification of the optic discs.

Results

Of 412 patients (288: Jonas 0, 103: I, and 21: II; baseline age: 20–60 years), 65 converted to perimetric glaucoma during follow-up (0.5–23.3 years; median 5.5 years). Optic disc classification was a strong risk factor for conversion (log rank p < 0.0001), and patients with more advanced changes progressed earlier. In the multivariate analysis (log rank p = 0.005), only PERG amplitude remained an independent risk factor after stratification for optic disc morphology (p = 0.021), with a ~ 30% higher risk per μV amplitude decrease.

Conclusions

PERG helps to estimate glaucoma suspects’ risk for visual field defects.

Casson RJ, Chidlow G, Wood JPM et al (2012) Definition of glaucoma: clinical and experimental concepts. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 40:341–349. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1442-9071.2012.02773.xCrossRefPubMed

Quigley HA, Broman AT (2006) The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br J Ophthalmol 90:262–267. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.2005.081224CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Prum BE, Rosenberg LF, Gedde SJ et al (2016) Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma Preferred Practice Pattern(®) Guidelines. Ophthalmology 123:P41–P111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.10.053CrossRefPubMed

Nayak BK, Maskati QB, Parikh R (2011) The unique problem of glaucoma: under-diagnosis and over-treatment. Indian J Ophthalmol 59(Suppl):S1-2. https://doi.org/10.4103/0301-4738.73677CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Jonas JB, Gusek GC, Naumann GO (1988) Optic disc morphometry in chronic primary open-angle glaucoma. I. Morphometric intrapapillary characteristics. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Albrecht Von Graefes Arch Klin Exp Ophthalmol 226:522–530. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02169199CrossRef

Yuksel Elgin C, Chen D, Al-Aswad LA (2022) Ophthalmic imaging for the diagnosis and monitoring of glaucoma: A review. Clin Experiment Ophthalmol 50:183–197. https://doi.org/10.1111/ceo.14044CrossRefPubMed

van der Schoot J, Reus NJ, Colen TP, Lemij HG (2010) The ability of short-wavelength automated perimetry to predict conversion to glaucoma. Ophthalmology 117:30–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2009.06.046CrossRefPubMed

Horn FK, Brenning A, Jünemann AG, Lausen B (2007) Glaucoma detection with frequency doubling perimetry and short-wavelength perimetry. J Glaucoma 16:363–371. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0b013e318032e4c2CrossRefPubMed

Takahashi G, Demirel S, Johnson CA (2017) Predicting conversion to glaucoma using standard automated perimetry and frequency doubling technology. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 255:797–803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-016-3573-xCrossRefPubMed

10.

Anderson AJ, Johnson CA (2003) Frequency-doubling technology perimetry. Ophthalmol Clin N Am 16:213–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896-1549(03)00011-7CrossRef

11.

Quaid PT, Flanagan JG (2005) Defining the limits of flicker defined form: effect of stimulus size, eccentricity and number of random dots. Vision Res 45:1075–1084. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2004.10.013CrossRefPubMed

12.

Horn FK, Kremers J, Mardin CY et al (2015) Flicker-defined form perimetry in glaucoma patients. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Albrecht Von Graefes Arch Für Klin Exp Ophthalmol 253:447–455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-014-2887-9CrossRef

13.

Frisén L (2002) New, sensitive window on abnormal spatial vision: rarebit probing. Vision Res 42:1931–1939. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(02)00102-5CrossRefPubMed

14.

Martin L, Wanger P (2004) New perimetric techniques: a comparison between rarebit and frequency doubling technology perimetry in normal subjects and glaucoma patients. J Glaucoma 13:268–272. https://doi.org/10.1097/00061198-200408000-00002CrossRefPubMed

15.

Frisén L (1992) High-pass resolution perimetry. Neuro-Ophthalmol 12:257–264. https://doi.org/10.3109/01658109209058148CrossRef

16.

Chauhan BC (2000) The value of high-pass resolution perimetry in glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 11:85–89CrossRefPubMed

17.

Bach M, Brigell MG, Hawlina M et al (2013) ISCEV standard for clinical pattern electroretinography (PERG): 2012 update. Doc Ophthalmol 126:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-012-9353-yCrossRefPubMed

18.

Frishman L, Sustar M, Kremers J et al (2018) ISCEV extended protocol for the photopic negative response (PhNR) of the full-field electroretinogram. Doc Ophthalmol 136:207–211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-018-9638-xCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Jonas JB, Budde WM, Panda-Jonas S (1999) Ophthalmoscopic evaluation of the optic nerve head. Surv Ophthalmol 43:293–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0039-6257(98)00049-6CrossRefPubMed

20.

Quigley HA, Dunkelberger GR, Green WR (1989) Retinal ganglion cell atrophy correlated with automated perimetry in human eyes with glaucoma. Am J Ophthalmol 107:453–464CrossRefPubMed

21.

Medeiros FA (2017) Biomarkers and Surrogate Endpoints: Lessons Learned From Glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 58:BIO20–BIO26. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.17-21987

22.

Elliott MR, Conlon ASC, Li Y et al (2015) Surrogacy marker paradox measures in meta-analytic settings. Biostat Oxf Engl 16:400–412. https://doi.org/10.1093/biostatistics/kxu043CrossRef

23.

Porciatti V (1987) Non-linearities in the focal ERG evoked by pattern and uniform-field stimulation. Their variation in retinal and optic nerve dysfunction. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 28:1306–1313PubMed

24.

Bach M, Hiss P, Röver J (1988) Check-size specific changes of pattern electroretinogram in patients with early open-angle glaucoma. Doc Ophthalmol Adv Ophthalmol 69:315–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00154412CrossRef

25.

Wanger P, Persson HE (1983) Pattern-reversal electroretinograms in unilateral glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 24:749–753PubMed

26.

Papst N, Bopp M, Schnaudigel OE (1984) Pattern electroretinogram and visually evoked cortical potentials in glaucoma. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Albrecht Von Graefes Arch Klin Exp Ophthalmol 222:29–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02133774CrossRef

27.

Korth M, Horn F, Storck B, Jonas J (1989) The pattern-evoked electroretinogram (PERG): age-related alterations and changes in glaucoma. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Albrecht Von Graefes Arch Klin Exp Ophthalmol 227:123–130. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02169783CrossRef

28.

Hood DC, Xu L, Thienprasiddhi P et al (2005) The pattern electroretinogram in glaucoma patients with confirmed visual field deficits. Investig Opthalmol Vis Sci 46:2411. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.05-0238CrossRef

29.

Sehi M, Grewal DS, Goodkin ML, Greenfield DS (2010) Reversal of retinal ganglion cell dysfunction after surgical reduction of intraocular pressure. Ophthalmology 117:2329–2336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2010.08.049CrossRefPubMed

30.

Ventura LM, Porciatti V (2005) Restoration of retinal ganglion cell function in early glaucoma after intraocular pressure reduction: a pilot study. Ophthalmology 112:20–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.09.002CrossRefPubMed

31.

Fry LE, Fahy E, Chrysostomou V et al (2018) The coma in glaucoma: Retinal ganglion cell dysfunction and recovery. Prog Retin Eye Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.preteyeres.2018.04.001CrossRefPubMed

32.

Bach M, Unsoeld AS, Philippin H et al (2006) Pattern ERG as an early glaucoma indicator in ocular hypertension: a long-term, prospective study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 47:4881–4887. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.05-0875CrossRefPubMed

33.

Bode SFN, Jehle T, Bach M (2011) Pattern electroretinogram in glaucoma suspects: new findings from a longitudinal study. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 52:4300–4306. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.10-6381CrossRefPubMed

34.

Odom JV, Bach M, Brigell M et al (2010) ISCEV standard for clinical visual evoked potentials (2009 update). Doc Ophthalmol 120:111–119. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-009-9195-4CrossRefPubMed

35.

Horn FK, Jonas JB, Budde WM et al (2002) Monitoring glaucoma progression with visual evoked potentials of the blue-sensitive pathway. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 43:1828–1834PubMed

36.

Horn FK, Bergua A, Jünemann A, Korth M (2000) Visual evoked potentials under luminance contrast and color contrast stimulation in glaucoma diagnosis. J Glaucoma 9:428–437. https://doi.org/10.1097/00061198-200012000-00003CrossRefPubMed

37.

Clark TG, Bradburn MJ, Love SB, Altman DG (2003) Survival Analysis Part I: Basic concepts and first analyses. Br J Cancer 89:232–238. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6601118CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Bradburn MJ, Clark TG, Love SB, Altman DG (2003) Survival Analysis Part II: Multivariate data analysis – an introduction to concepts and methods. Br J Cancer 89:431–436. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6601119CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

39.

Ishida K, Yamamoto T, Kitazawa Y (1998) Clinical factors associated with progression of normal-tension glaucoma. J Glaucoma 7:372–377CrossRefPubMed

40.

Jonas JB, Martus P, Horn FK et al (2004) Predictive factors of the optic nerve head for development or progression of glaucomatous visual field loss. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 45:2613–2618. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.03-1274CrossRefPubMed

41.

Leske MC, Heijl A, Hyman L et al (2007) Predictors of long-term progression in the early manifest glaucoma trial. Ophthalmology 114:1965–1972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2007.03.016CrossRefPubMed

42.

Schrems WA, Schrems-Hoesl L-M, Mardin CY et al (2017) Can glaucomatous visual field progression be predicted by structural and functional measures? J Glaucoma 26:373–382. https://doi.org/10.1097/IJG.0000000000000628CrossRefPubMed

43.

Korth M, Nguyen NX, Jünemann A et al (1994) VEP test of the blue-sensitive pathway in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 35:2599–2610PubMed

44.

Korth M, Horn F, Jonas J (1993) Utility of the color pattern-electroretinogram (PERG) in glaucoma. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Albrecht Von Graefes Arch Klin Exp Ophthalmol 231:84–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00920218CrossRef

45.

Porciatti V, Burr DC, Morrone MC, Fiorentini A (1992) The effects of aging on the pattern electroretinogram and visual evoked potential in humans. Vision Res 32:1199–1209. https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6989(92)90214-4CrossRefPubMed

46.

Trick GL (1992) Pattern electroretinogram: an electrophysiological technique applicable to primary open-angle glaucoma and ocular hypertension. J Glaucoma 1:271–279CrossRefPubMed

47.

Youden WJ (1950) Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer 3:32–35. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(1950)3:1%3c32::aid-cncr2820030106%3e3.0.co;2-3CrossRefPubMed

48.

Garway-Heath DF, Holder GE, Fitzke FW, Hitchings RA (2002) Relationship between electrophysiological, psychophysical, and anatomical measurements in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 43:2213–2220PubMed

49.

O’Donaghue E, Arden GB, O’Sullivan F et al (1992) The pattern electroretinogram in glaucoma and ocular hypertension. Br J Ophthalmol 76:387–394. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjo.76.7.387CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

50.

Parisi V, Miglior S, Manni G et al (2006) Clinical ability of pattern electroretinograms and visual evoked potentials in detecting visual dysfunction in ocular hypertension and glaucoma. Ophthalmology 113:216–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2005.10.044CrossRefPubMed

51.

Pfeiffer N, Bach M (1992) The pattern-electroretinogram in glaucoma and ocular hypertension. A cross-sectional and longitudinal study. Ger J Ophthalmol 1:35–40PubMed

52.

Tirsi A, Orshan D, Wong B et al (2022) Associations between steady-state pattern electroretinography and estimated retinal ganglion cell count in glaucoma suspects. Doc Ophthalmol Adv Ophthalmol 145:11–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-022-09869-9CrossRef

Title: Pattern electroretinogram, blue-yellow visual evoked potentials and the risk of developing visual field defects in glaucoma suspects: a longitudinal “survival” analysis with a very long follow-up
Authors: Cord Huchzermeyer
Robert Lämmer
Christian Y. Mardin
Friedrich E. Kruse
Jan Kremers
Folkert K. Horn
Publication date: 06-01-2024
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Glaucoma
Evoked Potential
Evoked Potential
Visually Evoked Potential
Visually Evoked Cortical Potential
Published in: Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology / Issue 5/2024
Print ISSN: 0721-832X
Electronic ISSN: 1435-702X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-023-06364-y

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Pattern electroretinogram, blue-yellow visual evoked potentials and the risk of developing visual field defects in glaucoma suspects: a longitudinal “survival” analysis with a very long follow-up

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2024

Vitreomacular interface abnormalities in type 2 macular telangiectasia (MacTel)

Relationship between ischemic index, leakage index, and macular edema in branch retinal vein occlusion

Anatomical changes in idiopathic epiretinal membrane at 2-year follow-up assessed using spectral domain optical coherence tomography and optical coherence tomographic angiography

Management of experimental trabeculectomy filtering blebs via crosslinking of the scleral flap inhibited vascularization

Accuracy of intraoperative aberrometry versus modern preoperative methods in post-myopic laser vision correction eyes undergoing cataract surgery with capsular tension ring placement

The effect of different pterygium surgery techniques on the ocular surface parameters in different durations: a systematic review and meta-analysis