May 2006
Volume 47, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2006
Enhanced Diagnosis of AMD by Comparing Central and Peripheral Dark Adaptation
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • P.N. Dimitrov
    Center for Eye Research Australia, University of Melbourne, East Melbourne, Australia
  • A.J. Vingrys
    Department of Optometry and Vision Sciences, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Australia
  • R.H. Guymer
    Center for Eye Research Australia, University of Melbourne, East Melbourne, Australia
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  P.N. Dimitrov, None; A.J. Vingrys, None; R.H. Guymer, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  NHMRC Grant (350224 RHG/AJV)
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2006, Vol.47, 2112. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      P.N. Dimitrov, A.J. Vingrys, R.H. Guymer; Enhanced Diagnosis of AMD by Comparing Central and Peripheral Dark Adaptation . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2006;47(13):2112.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: : Rods are affected in Age–related Macular Degeneration (AMD) especially in the paramacular region. In this work we contrast the dark adaptation of paramacular regions with peripheral retina in patients having different forms of AMD.

Methods: : Dark adaptation recovery was compared at two retinal locations: 4° and 10° in 12 AMD patients. Group A comprised 7 people with high risk drusen in both eyes whereas Group B had drusen in the test eye and late stage AMD in their fellow eye (n=5). Adaptation was measured after ∼30% pigment bleach produced by a photographic flash. Stimulus (2°, 500 ms achromatic spot) was generated on a calibrated CRT monitor. Neutral density filters (2.6ND) were used to expose late cone and rod recovery phases in AMD patients. A running estimate of threshold was returned by a YES/NO paradigm using a modified tracking procedure. Data were modeled using two exponential decays to describe the cone and rod components.

Results: : We found significant abnormalities in the dark adaptation between groups at the 4° test location. Group A had significantly elevated cone absolute thresholds (Cab) when compared with Group B (–1.21 ± 0.17 vs –1.49 ± 0.07, p=0.042). Group A also had a significantly delayed rod–cone break (RCB; 26.5 ± 1.98 vs 12.1 ± 1.63, p=0.005). There was no significant difference between these groups at the peripheral location (Cab, –1.53 ± 0.19 vs –1.57 ± 0.17, p=0.63; RCB, 9.02 ± 1.45 vs –13.6 ± 2.77, p=0.59). Comparing central to peripheral performance, Group A showed a significantly greater delay in RCB at central locations only (p=0.003).

Conclusions: : These findings extend past observations for selective rod vulnerability by showing both rod and cone losses in central locations. We find that people with high risk drusen have marked central dark adaptation abnormalities not evident in people who have late stage AMD.

Keywords: age-related macular degeneration • macula/fovea • retinal neovascularization 
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×