Journals / Gülhane Tıp Dergisi / 2006 / Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 1

Our normal values of flash electroretinogram

Flaş elektroretinogram (FERG) normal değerlerimiz

Pages
14–18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Our results may be used as a reference for laboratories that are yet to assess their own normative values.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study was to have normative values of flash electroretinogram for flash electroretinogram evaluations.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The results were categorized into three age groups of 8-19, 20-39 and 40-59.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Our results may be used as a reference for laboratories that are yet to assess their own normative values.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:İleriye dönük çalışma · Elektroretinografi · Elektrofizyoloji

Abstract

The aim of this study was to have normative values of flash electroretinogram for flash electroretinogram evaluations. Flash electroretinograms belonging to volunteers who did not have any systemic and ocular pathology were recorded in the electrophysiotogy laboratory at the Ophthalmology Department of Gulhane Military Medical Academy. The results were categorized into three age groups of 8-19, 20-39 and 40-59. All the recordings were made by using the recommended standards of International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision. On the basis of International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision recommendations, normative values of flash electroretinogram were presented using the median values, and minimum and maximum limits belonging to 95£ confidence interval were also calculated. An emphasis was made that each laboratory should have its normative values in its own laboratory environment. Our results may be used as a reference for laboratories that are yet to assess their own normative values.

Özet

Çalışmamızda flaş elektroretinografi testi değerlendirmelerimiz için normal değerlerimizin tanımlanması amaçlanmıştır. GATA Göz Hastalıkları Anabilim Dalı Oküler Elektrofizyoloji laboratuvarında, sistemik ve oküler herhangi bir sorunu olmayan gönüllülere flaş elektroretinografi testi uygulanmıştır. Sonuçlar yaşlara göre üç grup halinde (8-19; 20-39; 40-59) değerlendirilmiştir. Tüm kayıtlar Uluslararası Elektrofizyoloji Cemiyeti'nin tavsiye ettiği standartlar kullanılarak yapılmıştır. Uluslararası Elektrofizyoloji Cemiyeti'nin tavsiyeleri doğrultusunda flaş elektroretinografi normal değerleri ortanca cinsinden verilmiş ve %95 güven aralığında alt ve üst sınırlar da hesaplanmıştır. Elektrofizyoloji laboratuvarlarının normal değerlerini kendi özgün ortamlarında belirlemeleri gerekliliği vurgulanmıştır. Bu sonuçlar normal değerlerini henüz ortaya koymamış laboratuvarlar için referans teşkil edebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÜNDOĞAN, F. Ç., ERDEM, Ü., HAMURCU, Ş. M., SOBACI, G., BAYRAKTAR, M. Z. (2006). Our normal values of flash electroretinogram. Gülhane Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 1, 14–18. https://ajindex.com/articles/225559

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. Marmor MF, Holder G.E, Seeliger MW, Yamamoto S. Standard for clinical electroretinography. Doc Ophthalmol 2004; 108: 107-114
  2. İlker SS, Sobacı G, Yıldırım E. Flaş ERG, Desen ERG, EOG, flaş VER, desen VER, desen Onset-Offset VER'in toplumumuzdaki normal değerleri. Türk Oftalmoloji Gazetesi 1992; 22: 193-195
  3. Harden A, Adams GGW, Taylor DSİ. The electroretinogram. Arch Dis Child 1989; 64: 1080-1087
  4. Jacobi PC, Miliczek KD, Zrenner E. Experiences with the international standart for clinical electroretinography: normative values for clinical practice, interindividual and intraindividtial variations and possible extensions. Doc Ophthalmol 1993; 85: 95-114
  5. Burian HM, Allen L. A speculum contact lens for electroretinography. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1954; 6: 509-511
  6. Fishman GA. The Electroretinogram. In: Fishman GA, Birch DG, Holder GA, Bngell MG (eds). Electrophysiologic Testing in Disorders of the Retina, Optic Nerve and Visual Pathway. 2nd ed. Singapore: The Foundation of the American Academy of Ophthalmology, 2001: 1-28
  7. Dawson WW, Trick GL, Litzkow CA. Improved electrode for electroretinography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1979; 18: 988-991
  8. Hebert M, Vaegan, Lachapelle P. Reproducibility of ERG responses obtained with the DTL electrode. Vis Res 1999; 39: 1069-1070
  9. Lachapelle P, Benoit J, Little JM et al. Recording the oscillatory potentials of the electroretinogram with the DTL electrode. Doc Ophthalmol 1993; 83: 119-130
  10. Gouras P. Electroretinography: some basic principles. Invest Ophthalmol 1970; 9: 557-569
  11. Rabin AR, Berson EL. A full-field system for clinical electroretinography. Arch Ophthalmol 1974; 92: 59-63
  12. Kooijman AC. Light distribution on the retina of a wide-angle theoretical eye. J Opt Soc Am 1983; 73: 1544-1550
  13. Mactier H, Dexter JD, Hewett JE, et al. The electroretinogram in preterm infants. J Pediatr 1988; 113:607-612
  14. Kriss A, Russell-Eggitt I. Electrophysiological assessment of visual pathway function in infants. Eye 1992; 6: 145-153
  15. Birch DG, Anderson JL. Standardized full field electroretinography: normal values and their variation with age. Arch Ophthalmol 1992; 110: 1571-1576
  16. Fulton AB. The development of scotopic retinal function in human infants. Doc Ophthalmol 1988; 69: 101-109
  17. Fulton AB, Hansen RM. Electroretinography: application to clinical studies of infants. J Pediatr Ophthalmol Strabismus 1985;22:251-255
  18. Tatlıpınar S, Şener EC, Mocan MC, Sanaç AŞ,