Comparisons of contact lens, foil, fiber and skin electrodes for patterns electroretinograms

Documenta Ophthalmologica

Volumn 94, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 327-340

  Mcculloch, Daphne L ^a   Van Boemel, Gretchen B ^b   Borchert, Mark S ^c  

^a GLASGOW CALEDONIAN UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b DOHENY EYE INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c CHILDREN S HOSPITAL LOS ANGELES   (United States)

Author keywords

Contact lens electrode; Electrode; Fiber electrode; Foil electrode; Pattern electroretinogram; Skin electrode

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTACT LENS; ELECTRODE; ELECTRORETINOGRAM; EVOKED VISUAL RESPONSE; HUMAN; RETINA; SKIN;

EID: 0031390413     PISSN: 00124486     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF02580858     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Maffei L. Electroretinographic and visual cortical potentials in response to alternating gratings. Ann N Y Acad Sei 1982; 388: 1-9.
2. Beminger TA, Arden GB. The pattern electroretinogram. Eye 1988; 2(suppl): S257-83.
3. Sherman J. Simultaneous pattern -reversal electroretinograms and visual evoked potentials in diseases of the macula and optic nerve. Ann N Y Acad Sei 1982; 388: 214-26.
4. Celesia GG, Kaufman D, Cone S. Simultaneous recording of pattern electroretinography and visual evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis: a method to separate demyelnation from axonal damage. Arch Neurol 1986; 43: 1247-52.
5. Hull BM, Thompson DA. A review of the clinical applications of the pattern electroretinogram. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 1989; 9: 143-52.
6. Bradshaw K. Early onset of abnormality of the pattern-evoked. ERG in patients with optic neuritis. Clin Vision Sei 1992; 4; 313-25.
7. Bach M, Gerling J, Geiger K. Optic atrophy reduces the pattern-electroretinogram for both fine and coarse stimulus patterns. Clin Vision Sei 1992; 4: 327-33.
8. Odom JV, Holder GE, Feghali JG, Cavender S. Pattern electroretinogram intrasession reliability: a two center comparison. Clin Vision Sei 1992; 4: 263-81.
9. Marmor M, Holder GE, Porciatti V, Trick GI, Zrenner E for ISCEV. Guidelines for basic pattern electroretinography: recommendations by the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision. Doc Ophthalmol. In press. 1996; 91: 291-298.
10. Robins J, Turner J. Assessment of various types of electrode in clinical ERG. Impulse 1988; 5:2-5.
11. Gjötterberg M. Electrodes for electroretinography: a comparison of four different types. Arch Ophthalmol 1983; 104: 569-70.
12. Hawlina M, Konec B. New non-corneal 'HK-Ioop' electrode for clinical ERG. Doc Ophthalmol 1992; 81: 253-9.
13. Eskowitz L, Kriss A, Shawkat F. A comparison of flash electroretinograms recorded from Burian Alien, Jet, C-glide, gold foil, DTL and skin electrodes. Eye 1993; 7:169-71.
14. Papakostopoulos D, Barber C, Dean-Hart JC. The sampling properties of different types of ERG electrode. Clin Vision Sei 1993; 8: 481-8.
15. Hennessy MP, Vaegan. Amplitude scaling relationships of Burian-Allen, gold foil and Dawson, Trick and Litzkow electrodes. Doc Ophthalmol 1995; 89: 235-48.
16. Kriss A, Jeffrey B, Taylor D. The electroretinogram in infants and children. J Clin Neurophysiol 1992; 9: 373-93.
17. Coupland SG, Janaky M. ERG electrode in pediatric patients: comparison of DTL fibre, PVA-gel and non-corneal skin electrodes. Doc Ophthalmol 1989; 71: 427-34.
18. Wali N, Leguire LE. Dark adapted luminance-response functions with skin and corneal electrodes. Doc Ophthalmol 1991; 76: 367-75.
19. Hawlina M. Pattern electroretinography with the new HK-loop electrode. Chibret Int J Ophthalmol 1993; 9: 51-58.
20. Prager TC, Saad N, Schweitzer FC, Garcia CA, Arden GB. Electrode comparison in pattern electroretinography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sei 1992; 33: 390-4.
21. Burian HM, Allen L. A speculum contact lens electrode for electroretinography. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1954; 6: 509-11.
22. Lawill T, Burian HM. A modification of the Burian-Allen contact lens electrode for electroretinography. Am J Ophthalmol 1966; 61: 1506-9.
23. Barber C. Electrodes and the recording of the human electroretinogram (ERG). Int J Psychophysiol 1994; 16: 131-6.
24. Dawson W\V, Trick GL, Litzkow CA. Improved electrode for electroretinography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sei 1979; 18: 988-91.
25. Arden GB, Carter RM, Hogg C, Siegal IM, Margolis S. A gold foil electrode: extending the horizons for clinical electroretinography. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sei 1979; 16:421-6.
26. Adashi-Usami E, Kuroda N, Nakajima I. Distribution of pattern-evoked potentials in the facial area. Am J Ophthalmol 1983; 96: 734-739.
27. Peachy NS, Sokol S, Moskowitz A. Recording the contralateral PERG: effect of different electrodes. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sei 1983; 24: 1514-6.
28. Seiple WH, Seigel IM. Recording the pattern electroretinogram: a cautionary note. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sei 1983; 24: 796-798.
29. Winer BJ. Statistical principals in experimental design. International student edition. Tokyo: McGraw Hill Kogakusha Ltd, 1971: 196-201.
30. Marmor MF, Zrenner E, for the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision. Standard for clinical electroretinography (1994 update). Doc Ophthalmol 1995; 89: 199-210.
31. Harden A. Non-corneal electroretinogram. Br J Ophthalmol 1974; 58: 811-6.
32. Hebert M, Lachapelle P, Dumont M. Reproducibility of electroretinograms recorded with DTL electrodes. Doc Ophthalmol 1996; 91: 333-42.
33. Prager TC, Fea AM, Sponsel WE, Schweitzer FC, McNulty L, Garcia CA. The gold foil electrode in pattern electroretinography. Doc Ophthalmol 1994; 86: 267-274.
34. Arden GB, Hogg C, Holder GE. Gold foil electrodes: a two centre study of electrode reliability. Doc Ophthalmol 1994; 86: 275-84.
35. Vaegan. Electrode standards in electroretinography. Doc Ophthalmol 1996; 92: 243-5.