4.4 Article

Evaluation of residual retinal function by pupillary constrictions and phosphenes using transcorneal electrical stimulation in patients with retinal degeneration

Journal

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00417-006-0260-3

Keywords

retinitis pigmentosa; cone-rod dystrophy; pupillary reflex; phosphene; transcorneal electrical stimulation

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: To evaluate inner-retinal function by pupillary constrictions and phosphenes evoked by transcorneal electrical stimulation (TES) in patients with hereditary retinal degeneration. Methods: Consecutive 20 eyes of 20 patients (16 with retinitis pigmentosa (RP); and four with cone-rod dystrophy (CRD)) whose visual acuity was equal to or worse than 20/2000 at Osaka University Hospital and eight eyes of eight healthy subjects were enrolled. TES was performed on with a contact lens stimulating electrode. The electrically evoked pupillary response (EEPR) was recorded by a pupillometer, and the phosphenes by the subjective responses. Three electrical current thresholds were determined: T1, threshold current for initial phosphene; T2, threshold for eliciting a phosphene extending into the central field; and P, threshold for a relative pupillary constriction N3%.The EEPR and phosphene thresholds were compared with the visual acuity or the visual field. Results: All T1, T2 and P were significantly higher in patients than in normals (Mann-Whitney, P < 0.001). Both T1 and T2 were not correlated with visual acuity but depended on the area and location of the residual visual field. T1 and T2 in RP eyes with a EEPR was significantly lower than that in RP eyes without an EEPR. During TES, all subjects and patients had no pain, and no complications except for a slight corneal superficial punctuate keratopathy. Conclusions: The safety and the efficacy of TES to estimate the residual inner-retinal function in patients with retinal degeneration indicate that TES can be used as one of the most important test to select candidates for retinal prostheses.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available