Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T17:40:21.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Flash Electroretinogram Abnormalities in Patients with Clinically Definite Multiple Sclerosis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2015

Stuart G. Coupland  and
Trevor H. Kirkham
Stuart G. Coupland
Affiliation:
Departments of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Ophthalmology, McGill University, and the Department of Neuro-Ophthalmology at the Montreal Neurological Hospital
Trevor H. Kirkham*
Affiliation:
Departments of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Ophthalmology, McGill University, and the Department of Neuro-Ophthalmology at the Montreal Neurological Hospital
*
Department of Neuro-Ophthalmology, Montreal Neurological Hospital, 3801 University #201, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 2B4
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary:

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We studied the flash electroretinograms (ERGs) of 105 patients with multiple sclerosis who were divided into four groups. The first group had no history or clinical evidence of optic nerve dysfunction, the second and third groups had either left or right optic nerve disease respectively, and the fourth group had historical or clinical evidence of bilateral optic nerve disease.

Statistical analysis of the data using analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed that the group of patients with no history or clinical evidence of optic nerve disease had no significant difference from the control group for their peak b-wave implicit times but the other three groups were significantly delayed on the affected side(s). Using the Mann-Whitney U-test we found all four patient groups had significantly greater absolute interocular latency differences from the control group. The electroretinal contribution to flash VEP delay was also investigated. In those patients with unilateral or bilateral optic nerve disease we found that in 14–31% of those patients with flash VEP delay there was also abnormal prolongation of the ERG b-wave. These results confirm a high incidence of retinal dysfunction in multiple sclerosis patients and may suggest that transynaptic degeneration of retinal structures occurs in optic nerve demyelination. The significant absolute interocular latency difference in particular may provide another electrophysiological parameter to establish a diagnosis of multiple sclerosis in suspect cases.

Type
Hypothesis
Information
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , August 1982 , pp. 325 - 330
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Neurological Sciences Federation 1982

References

Babel, J., Stangos, N., Korol, S. and Spiritus, M. (1977) Ocular electrophysiology: a clinical and experimental study of electroretinogram. Publ. George Thiem, Stuttgardt.Google Scholar
Berry, H. (1976) Clinical electroretinography by the skin electrode and signal averaged method. Can. J. Ophthalmol. 11: 160–164.Google ScholarPubMed
Coupland, S.G. (1978) Time-domain analysis of steady-state electroretinal and visual evoked response to intermittent photic stimulation. Ph.D. thesis. Simon Fraser University.Google Scholar
Coupland, S.G. and Kirkham, T.H. (1982) Orientation-specific visual evoked potential deficits in multiple sclerosis. Can. J. Neurol. Sci. 9: 331–337.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feinsod, M., Abramsky, O. and Auerbach, E. (1973) Electrophysiological examination of the visual system in multiple sclerosis. J. Neurol. Sci. 20: 161–175.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frisen, L. and Hoyt, W.F. (1974) Insidious atrophy of retinal nerve fibers in multiple sclerosis. Arch. Ophthalmol. 82: 91–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gills, J.P. (1966) The electroretinogram after section of the optic nerve in man. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 62: 287–291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gutrow-Tyler, J.F., Crews, S.J. and Drasdo, N. (1978) Electroretinography with noncorneal and corneal electrodes. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 17: 1124–1127.Google Scholar
Halliday, A.M., Mcdonald, W.I. and Mushin, J. (1972) Delayed visual evoked response in optic neuritis. Lancet 1: 982–985.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ikeda, H., Tremain, K.E. and Sanders, M.D. (1978) Neurophysiological investigation in optic nerve disease: combined assessment of the visual evoked response and electroretinogram. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 62: 227–239.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirkham, T.H. and Coupland, S.G. (1981) Multiple regression analysis of diagnostic predictors in optic nerve disease. Can. J. Neurol. Sci. 8:67–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mcdonald, W.I. (1977) Pathophysiology of conduction in central nerve fibers. From: Visual Evoked Potentials in Man-New Developments. Desmedt JD (ed), Clarendon Press, pp. 427–437.Google Scholar
Mcdonald, W.I. and Halliday, A.M. (1977) Diagnosis and classification of multiple sclerosis. Br. Med. Bull., 33: 4–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Newman, E.A. (1980) Current source-density analysis of the b-wave of frog retina. J. Neurophysiol. 43: 1355–1366.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paty, J., Brenot, Ph., Henry, P. and Faure, J.M.A. (1976) Potentiels évoqués visuels et sclérose en plaques. Rev. Neurol. (Paris) 132:605–621.Google Scholar
Siegel, S. (1956) Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. McGraw-Hill Publishers, New York.Google Scholar
Tepas, D.I. and Armington, J.C. (1962) Electroretinograms from non corneal electrodes. Invest. Ophthalmol. 1: 784–786.Google Scholar