Pattern electroretinogram and psychophysical tests of visual function for discriminating between healthy and glaucoma eyes.

Journal Article (Journal Article)

PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of the pattern electroretinogram (pattern ERG) to that of standard automated perimetry (SAP), short-wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP), and frequency-doubling technology (FDT) perimetry for discriminating between healthy and glaucomatous eyes. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: Eighty-three eyes of 42 healthy recruits and 92 eyes of 54 glaucoma patients (based on optic disc appearance) from the University of California, San Diego, Diagnostic Innovations in Glaucoma Study were tested with pattern ERG for glaucoma detection (PERGLA; Lace Elettronica, Pisa, Italy), SAP, SWAP, and FDT within 9 months. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated and compared for pattern ERG amplitude and SAP, SWAP, and FDT mean deviation and pattern standard deviation (PSD). Sensitivities and specificities were compared and agreement among tests was described. RESULTS: The area under the ROC curve for pattern ERG amplitude was 0.744 (95% confidence interval = 0.670, 0.818). The ROC curve area was 0.786 (0.720, 0.853) for SAP PSD, 0.732 (0.659, 0.806) for SWAP PSD, and 0.818 (0.758, 0.879) for FDT PSD. At 95% specificity, sensitivities of SAP and FDT PSD were significantly higher than that of pattern ERG amplitude; at 80% specificity, similar sensitivities were observed among tests. Agreement among tests was slight to moderate. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic accuracy of the pattern ERG amplitude was similar to that of SAP and SWAP, but somewhat worse than that of FDT. Nevertheless, the pattern ERG may hold some advantage over psychophysical testing because of its largely objective nature.

Full Text

Duke Authors

Cited Authors

  • Tafreshi, A; Racette, L; Weinreb, RN; Sample, PA; Zangwill, LM; Medeiros, FA; Bowd, C

Published Date

  • March 2010

Published In

Volume / Issue

  • 149 / 3

Start / End Page

  • 488 - 495

PubMed ID

  • 20172073

Pubmed Central ID

  • PMC2827352

Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)

  • 1879-1891

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1016/j.ajo.2009.09.027


  • eng

Conference Location

  • United States