May 2005
Volume 46, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2005
Delayed Multifocal Electroretinogram Responses in Myopia
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • J.C. Chen
    Centre for Health Research – Optometry, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
    Vision CRC, Sydney, Australia
  • B. Brown
    Centre for Health Research – Optometry, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
    Vision CRC, Sydney, Australia
  • K.L. Schmid
    Centre for Health Research – Optometry, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
    Vision CRC, Sydney, Australia
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  J.C. Chen, None; B. Brown, None; K.L. Schmid, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  Lee Foundation of Singapore and QUT ECR Grant
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2005, Vol.46, 5601. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      J.C. Chen, B. Brown, K.L. Schmid; Delayed Multifocal Electroretinogram Responses in Myopia . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2005;46(13):5601.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Abstract: : Purpose: It is known that the first order kernel multifocal electroretinogram (mfERG) responses are reduced in amplitude and increased in latency in individuals with myopia. These changes have been suggested to be primarily due to the increased axial length that accompanies myopia. We sought to investigate whether the characteristics of mfERG responses were different between emmetropes and myopes and determine the contribution of axial length to the mfERG data. Methods: Thirty subjects, with a mean age of 24.2±4.0 years, underwent mfERG testing using VERIS I. Subjects were divided into emmetropic (n=10) and myopic groups (n=20) based on their refractive error. The mfERG stimulus array consisted of 61–scaled hexagons and flickered according to a pseudorandom binary m–sequence. The amplitude and latency of the first positive peak of the first order kernel were analysed. Results: Mean refractive error of emmetropes and myopes was 0.04±0.35 D and –3.60±2.21 D respectively (p < 0.0005), with corresponding axial lengths of 23.42±0.73 mm and 24.86±0.99 mm (p = 0.001). The mfERG response latency of myopes was significantly greater (by 1.6 to 3.1 ms, F1, 28 = 4.185, p = 0.05) than that of emmetropes. This difference was significant even when axial length was taken into account as a covariate (F1, 28 = 10.819, p = 0.003). There were no differences in response amplitudes between the groups (F1, 28 = 0.114, p = 0.738). Conclusions: Delayed mfERG responses are observed in myopes and this is not simply due to their greater axial length compared to emmetropes. This suggests that there are underlying differences in retinal processing that result from being myopic.

Keywords: myopia • electroretinography: clinical • refractive error development 
×
×

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.

×