Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Documenta Ophthalmologica 3/2020

Open Access 01-06-2020 | Uveitis | Original Research Article

Effects of DTL electrode position on the amplitude and implicit time of the electroretinogram

Authors: Anna H. Brouwer, Gerard C. de Wit, Joke H. de Boer, Maria M. van Genderen

Published in: Documenta Ophthalmologica | Issue 3/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

This study sought to investigate whether there is an optimal position of the Dawson, Trick, and Litzkow (DTL) electrodes when measuring the full-field electroretinogram (ERG) for monitoring purposes.

Methods

In 200 uveitis patients, an extended light-adapted (LA) ERG protocol was measured twice, incorporating the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision standards. First, a LA ERG was measured with the DTL in the lower lid position (LLP) and thereafter in the fornix position. Differences in amplitudes and implicit times of a-waves, b-waves, and the 30 Hz peak were investigated. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) as well as coefficients of variation (CoV) were calculated, to assess both reliability and relative variability between the two DTL positions.

Results

Implicit times showed no statistically significant differences between the two DTL positions. As expected, amplitudes at the different stimulus strengths were 1.12–1.19 higher in the LLP, but there were no significant differences in the CoV between the two DTL positions. The ICC was high for the b-wave and 30 Hz flicker response (0.842–0.979), but lower for the a-wave, especially for amplitudes (0.584–0.716).

Conclusions

For monitoring purposes in patients, we conclude that based on relative variability, no position is preferable above the other. However, because in most diseases amplitudes are decreased, the LLP may be chosen because it yields higher amplitudes. Whatever the choice, it is important to ensure that the DTL position remains stable during an ERG recording.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Dawson WW, Trick GL, Litzkow CA (1979) Improved electrode for electroretinography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 18:988–991PubMed Dawson WW, Trick GL, Litzkow CA (1979) Improved electrode for electroretinography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 18:988–991PubMed
3.
go back to reference Yin H, Pardue MT (2004) Performance of the DTL electrode compared to the jet contact lens electrode in clinical testing. Doc Ophthalmol 108:77–86CrossRef Yin H, Pardue MT (2004) Performance of the DTL electrode compared to the jet contact lens electrode in clinical testing. Doc Ophthalmol 108:77–86CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Westall CA, Dhaliwal HS, Panton CM et al (2001) Values of electroretinogram responses according to axial length. Doc Ophthalmol 102:115–130CrossRef Westall CA, Dhaliwal HS, Panton CM et al (2001) Values of electroretinogram responses according to axial length. Doc Ophthalmol 102:115–130CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Hebert M, Vaegan Lachapelle P (1999) Reproducibility of ERG responses obtained with the DTL electrode. Vision Res 39:1069–1070CrossRef Hebert M, Vaegan Lachapelle P (1999) Reproducibility of ERG responses obtained with the DTL electrode. Vision Res 39:1069–1070CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Hebert M, Lachapelle P, Dumont M (1996) Reproducibility of electroretinograms recorded with DTL electrodes. Doc Ophthalmol 91:333–342CrossRef Hebert M, Lachapelle P, Dumont M (1996) Reproducibility of electroretinograms recorded with DTL electrodes. Doc Ophthalmol 91:333–342CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Fuller DG, Knighton RW, Machemer R (1975) Bright-flash electroretinography for the evaluation of eyes with opaque vitreous. Am J Ophthalmol 80:214–223CrossRef Fuller DG, Knighton RW, Machemer R (1975) Bright-flash electroretinography for the evaluation of eyes with opaque vitreous. Am J Ophthalmol 80:214–223CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Kergoat H, Kergoat MJ, Justino L (2001) Age-related changes in the flash electroretinogram and oscillatory potentials in individuals age 75 and older. J Am Geriatr Soc 49:1212–1217CrossRef Kergoat H, Kergoat MJ, Justino L (2001) Age-related changes in the flash electroretinogram and oscillatory potentials in individuals age 75 and older. J Am Geriatr Soc 49:1212–1217CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Wright CE, Williams DE, Drasdo N, Harding GF (1985) The influence of age on the electroretinogram and visual evoked potential. Doc Ophthalmol 59:365–384CrossRef Wright CE, Williams DE, Drasdo N, Harding GF (1985) The influence of age on the electroretinogram and visual evoked potential. Doc Ophthalmol 59:365–384CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Otto T, Bach M (1997) Reproducibility of the pattern electroretinogram. Ophthalmologe 94:217–221CrossRef Otto T, Bach M (1997) Reproducibility of the pattern electroretinogram. Ophthalmologe 94:217–221CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Cringle SJ, Alder VA, Brown MJ, Yu DY (1986) Effect of scleral recording location on ERG amplitude. Curr Eye Res 5:959–965CrossRef Cringle SJ, Alder VA, Brown MJ, Yu DY (1986) Effect of scleral recording location on ERG amplitude. Curr Eye Res 5:959–965CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Effects of DTL electrode position on the amplitude and implicit time of the electroretinogram
Authors
Anna H. Brouwer
Gerard C. de Wit
Joke H. de Boer
Maria M. van Genderen
Publication date
01-06-2020
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keyword
Uveitis
Published in
Documenta Ophthalmologica / Issue 3/2020
Print ISSN: 0012-4486
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2622
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-019-09733-3

Other articles of this Issue 3/2020

Documenta Ophthalmologica 3/2020 Go to the issue