Full text
| |
| Author(s): |
Leonardo Provetti Cunha
Total Authors: 1
|
| Document type: | Doctoral Thesis |
| Press: | São Paulo. |
| Institution: | Universidade de São Paulo (USP). Faculdade de Medicina (FM/SBD) |
| Defense date: | 2010-08-09 |
| Examining board members: |
Mario Luiz Ribeiro Monteiro;
Adriana Berezovsky;
Francisco Max Damico;
Roberto Freire Santiago Malta;
Maria Kiyoko Oyamada
|
| Advisor: | Mario Luiz Ribeiro Monteiro |
| Abstract | |
PURPOSE: To evaluate the ability of full-field and hemifield pattern electroretinogram parameters to differentiate between healthy eyes and eyes with band atrophy of the optic nerve and also to evaluate the relationship between pattern electroretinogram amplitude, macular and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness by optical coherence tomography, and visual field loss on standard automated perimetry in eyes with BA of optic nerve. METHODS: Forty-one eyes from 41 patients with permanent temporal visual field defects from chiasmal compression and 41 healthy subjects underwent transient fullfield and hemifield (temporal or nasal) stimulation pattern electroretinogram, standard automated perimetry and time domain- optical coherence tomography macular and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness measurements. Comparisons were made using Students t-test. Deviation from normal visual field sensitivity for the central 18° was expressed in dB and 1/Lambert units. Correlations between measurements were verified by Pearsons correlations and linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Full-field P50, N95, and P50+N95 amplitude values were significantly smaller in eyes with band atrophy than in control eyes (P<0.001). Nasal and temporal hemifield pattern electroretinogram studies revealed significant differences in N95 and P50+N95 amplitudes measurements. Pattern electroretinogram and optical coherence tomography measurements were significantly lower in eyes with temporal hemianopia than in normal eyes. A significant correlation was found between visual field sensitivity loss and full-field or nasal, but not temporal, hemifield pattern electroretinogram amplitude. Likewise a significant correlation was found between visual field sensitivity loss and most optical coherence tomography parameters. No significant correlation was observed between optical coherence tomography and pattern electroretinogram parameters, except for nasal hemifield amplitude. A significant correlation was observed between several macular and retinal nerve fiber layer thickness parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Transient pattern electroretinogram amplitude measurements were efficient at differentiating eyes with band atrophy and permanent visual field defects from normal controls. In patients with chiasmal compression, pattern electroretinogram amplitude and optical coherence tomography thickness measurements were significant related to visual field loss, but not to each other. Pattern electroretinogram and optical coherence tomography quantify neuronal loss differently, but both technologies are useful in understanding structure-function relationship in patients with chiasmal compression (AU) | |