Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Fundus motion during mfERG testing

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
Documenta Ophthalmologica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to assess eye movements during a multifocal ERG (mfERG) recording. This study evaluated the relationship between bivariate contour ellipse areas (BCEAs), mfERG amplitudes (Amps) and mfERG implicit times (ITs) with repeat testing and experienced subjects.

Methods

Thirty subjects were selected (15 experienced to ocular procedures and 15 novices). All were confirmed to have healthy retinas and at least 20/25 vision. MfERGs with a stimulus near 100% contrast and 4-min m-sequence were recorded on two different days using our common clinical technique, which did not constrain the head. VERIS with fundus monitoring system was used for recording with a Burian-Allen electrode. An external camera captured the fundus during each mfERG recording. The optic nerve head position was tracked in each video using a custom algorithm in order to determine BCEAs. Each subject performed one mfERG on two different days. MfERGs were analyzed for Amps and ITs for the fovea and whole eye.

Results

There was no correlation between the mfERG metrics and BCEAs with repeat testing. There were also no differences between the experienced and novice subjects for mfERG Amps, ITs or BCEAs. Eye movements between visits were highly correlated (multiple r = 0.67). BCEAs were larger during mfERGs (1.04 ± 0.8 deg2) than those observed in previous literature using brief viewing tasks (< 0.3 deg2). The proportion of time spent fixating within 1.0 and 2.0 degrees of the central hexagon was 68 and 93%, respectively.

Conclusions

This study is the first to evaluate the stability of the retina while recording a mfERG in healthy subjects and indicates that the center of fixation during a mfERG stays within the central hexagon. Eye stability during an initial recording is the best indicator of stability on the second recording. The amount of movement during these recordings did not seem to affect the mfERG Amps or ITs. These data suggest clinical confidence with mfERGs when recording novice patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

These data used in this study are available by the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Code availability

Available upon request.

Complaince with ethical standards.

References

  1. Hood DC, Odel JG, Chen CS, Winn BJ (2003) The multifocal electroretinogram. J Neuroophthalmol 23(3):225–235. https://doi.org/10.1097/00041327-200309000-00008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sutter EE, Tran D (1992) The field topography of ERG components in man–I. Photopic Luminance Response Vision Res 32(3):433–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6989(92)90235-b

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Chu PH, Chan HH, Leat SJ (2006) Effects of unsteady fixation on multifocal electroretinogram (mfERG). Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 244(10):1273–1282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-006-0304-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Simão S, Costa M, Sun JK, Cunha-Vaz J, Simó R (2017) Development of a normative database for multifocal electroretinography in the context of a multicenter clinical trial. Ophthalmic Res 57(2):107–117. https://doi.org/10.1159/000450958

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Oyamada MK, Dotto PdF, Abdalla M (2007) Fatores técnicos intervenientes na realização do exame de eletrorretinograma multifocal (ERGmf). Arq Bras Oftalmol 70:713–717

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Keating D, Parks S, Evans A (2000) Technical aspects of multifocal ERG recording. Doc Ophthalmol 100(2–3):77–98. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1002723501303

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Zhang B, Stevenson SS, Cheng H, Laron M, Kumar G, Tong J, Chino YM (2008) Effects of fixation instability on multifocal VEP (mfVEP) responses in amblyopes. J Vis 8(3):1611–1614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chisholm JA, Keating D, Parks S, Evans AL (2001) The impact of fixation on the multifocal electroretinogram. Doc Ophthalmol 102(2):131–139. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1017536625847

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Henriques JF, Caseiro R, Martins P, Batista J (2015) High-speed tracking with kernelized correlation filters. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 37(3):583–596. https://doi.org/10.1109/tpami.2014.2345390

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bradski G (2000) The OpenCV library. Dr Dobb’s J Softw Tools 25:120–125

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bellmann C, Feely M, Crossland MD, Kabanarou SA, Rubin GS (2004) Fixation stability using central and pericentral fixation targets in patients with age-related macular degeneration. Ophthalmology 111(12):2265–2270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2004.06.019

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Castet E, Crossland M (2012) Quantifying eye stability during a fixation task: a review of definitions and methods. See Perceiv 25(5):449–469. https://doi.org/10.1163/187847611X620955

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Di Russo F, Pitzalis S, Spinelli D (2003) Fixation stability and saccadic latency in elite shooters. Vision Res 43(17):1837–1845. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0042-6989(03)00299-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rohrschneider K, Becker M, Schumacher N, Fendrich T, Volcker HE (1998) Normal values for fundus perimetry with the scanning laser ophthalmoscope. Am J Ophthalmol 126(1):52–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9394(98)00065-8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Timberlake GT, Mainster MA, Peli E, Augliere RA, Essock EA, Arend LE (1986) Reading with a macular scotoma I retinal location of scotoma and fixation area. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 27(7):1137–1147

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Steinman RM (1965) Effect of target size, luminance, and color on monocular fixation*. J Opt Soc Am 55(9):1158–1164. https://doi.org/10.1364/JOSA.55.001158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Timberlake GT, Sharma MK, Grose SA, Gobert DV, Gauch JM, Maino JH (2005) Retinal location of the preferred retinal locus relative to the fovea in scanning laser ophthalmoscope images. Optom Vis Sci 82(3):177–185. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.opx.0000156311.49058.c8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Menz M, Sutter E, Menz M (2004) The effect of fixation instability on the multifocal VEP. Doc Ophthalmol 109(2):147–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-004-3790-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dunbar HM, Crossland MD, Rubin GS (2010) Fixation stability: a comparison between the Nidek MP-1 and the rodenstock scanning laser ophthalmoscope in persons with and without diabetic maculopathy. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 51(8):4346–4350. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.09-4556

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rohrschneider K, Becker M, Kruse FE, Fendrich T, Völcker HE (1995) Stability of fixation: results of fundus-controlled examination using the scanning laser ophthalmoscope. Ger J Ophthalmol 4(4):197–202

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rohrschneider K, Becker M, Schumacher N, Fendrich T, Völcker HE (1998) Normal values for fundus perimetry with the scanning laser ophthalmoscope. Am J Ophthalmol 126(1):52–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9394(98)00065-8

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fujii GY, de Juan E Jr, Sunness J, Humayun MS, Pieramici DJ, Chang TS (2002) Patient selection for macular translocation surgery using the scanning laser ophthalmoscope. Ophthalmology 109(9):1737–1744. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0161-6420(02)01120-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hawlina M, Konec B (1992) New noncorneal HK-loop electrode for clinical electroretinography. Doc Ophthalmol 81(2):253–259. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00156014

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hammer DX, Ferguson RD, Magill JC, Paunescu LA, Beaton S, Ishikawa H, Wollstein G, Schuman JS (2005) Active retinal tracker for clinical optical coherence tomography systems. J Biomed Opt 10(2):024038–024038. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.1896967

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ferguson RD, Hammer DX, Paunescu LA, Beaton S, Schuman JS (2004) Tracking optical coherence tomography. Opt Lett 29(18):2139–2141. https://doi.org/10.1364/ol.29.002139

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Ishikawa H, Gabriele ML, Wollstein G, Ferguson RD, Hammer DX, Paunescu LA, Beaton SA, Schuman JS (2006) Retinal nerve fiber layer assessment using optical coherence tomography with active optic nerve head tracking. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 47(3):964–967. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.05-0748

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Guestrin ED, Eizenman M (2006) General theory of remote gaze estimation using the pupil center and corneal reflections. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 53(6):1124–1133. https://doi.org/10.1109/tbme.2005.863952

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mestre C, Gautier J, Pujol J (2018) Robust eye tracking based on multiple corneal reflections for clinical applications. J Biomed Opt 23(3):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.Jbo.23.3.035001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Palmowski-Wolfe AM, Woerdehoff U (2005) A comparison of the fast stimulation multifocal-ERG in patients with an IOL and control groups of different age. Doc Ophthalmol 111(2):87–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-005-4506-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Mohidin N, Yap MK, Jacobs RJ (1999) Influence of age on the multifocal electroretinography. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 19(6):481–488. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1475-1313.1999.00468.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Feigl B, Stewart IB, Brown B, Zele AJ (2008) Local neuroretinal function during acute hypoxia in healthy older people. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 49(2):807–813. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.07-0994

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Fragiotta S, Carnevale C, Cutini A, Rigoni E, Grenga PL, Vingolo EM (2018) Factors influencing fixation stability area: a comparison of two methods of recording. Optom Vis Sci 95(4):384–390. https://doi.org/10.1097/opx.0000000000001201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Schonbach EM, Ibrahim MA, Kong X, Strauss RW, Munoz B, Birch DG, Sunness JS, West SK, Scholl HPN (2017) Metrics and acquisition modes for fixation stability as a visual function biomarker. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 58(6):268–276. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.17-21710

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Longhin E, Convento E, Pilotto E, Bonin G, Vujosevic S, Kotsafti O, Midena E (2013) Static and dynamic retinal fixation stability in microperimetry. Can J Ophthalmol 48(5):375–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjo.2013.05.021

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Zhu X, He W, Zhang K, Zhang Y, Fan Q, Lu Y (2019) Fixation characteristics in highly myopic eyes: the Shanghai high myopia study. Sci Rep 9(1):6502. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-42895-3

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Dr. Laura Frishman for assistance with the manuscript, Dr. Scott Stevenson for consideration with the results, Dr. Marcus Bearse for assistance formulating initial ideas, and Nicole Karson for data collection.

Funding

This work was supported by UHCO startup funds to the labs of Dr. Wendy W. Harrison and Dr. Daniel R. Coates. NIH EY007088 also provided funding for AJ and RW.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Houston College of Optometry, Houston, TX, USA

    Jennyffer D. Smith, Allison Jussel, Rachel Wang, Daniel R. Coates & Wendy W. Harrison

Authors
  1. Jennyffer D. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Allison Jussel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rachel Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Daniel R. Coates
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Wendy W. Harrison
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennyffer D. Smith.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors certify and declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Consent for publication

Jennyffer Smith, Yes; Allison Jussel, Yes; Rachel Wang, Yes; Daniel R. Coates, Yes; Wendy W. Harrison, Yes.

Ethical approval

University of Houston IRB approval for study 1637.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained by all participants of this study.

Statement of human rights

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the University of Houston Institutional Review Board and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Statement on the welfare of animals

No animals were used in this study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Smith, J.D., Jussel, A., Wang, R. et al. Fundus motion during mfERG testing. Doc Ophthalmol 143, 129–139 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-021-09829-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-021-09829-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation