Abstract
To report the electrophysiological findings in patients with unilateral optic neuritis (ON), with particular reference to the electroretinogram (ERG). A retrospective analysis of full-field ERG, pattern ERG (PERG) and pattern visual evoked potential findings from 46 patients with clinical and electrophysiological findings in keeping with unilateral ON. ISCEV standard ERGs did not significantly differ between the optic neuritis and fellow eyes, nor between patients with and without MS. Differences were present in the N95 component of the PERG, which was significantly lower in the affected eye, and the pattern reversal visual evoked potential, which showed significantly longer peak time (latency) in the affected eye. In addition, there was a significant difference between patients with and without multiple sclerosis (MS). No significant inter-ocular asymmetry in ISCEV standard ERGs was present in these cases of unilateral optic neuritis, either as a clinically isolated syndrome or as part of multiple sclerosis. All ERGs recorded were normal.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
Since the first reports by Halliday’s group in the early 1970s [1, 2], the changes in pattern reversal visual evoked potential (PVEP) in optic neuritis (ON) and multiple sclerosis (MS) have been well characterised and have been summarised in many review articles e.g. [3, 4]. Although it is well known that MS can be associated with retinal abnormalities [5], there has been a recent increase in interest in the vascular changes that can occur in MS and neuromyelitis optica (NMO) and, thus, a renewed interest in the electroretinogram (ERG) changes in these conditions [6].
An early report in 1966, of retinal function in advanced MS, described a reduced ERG in the majority of cases [7]. Auerbach subsequently reported changes in the ERG in patients with optic nerve disease (18/69 with optic neuritis); “enhanced ERGs” were present in 29 of 69 cases (42%) usually in both eyes, but a lower ERG amplitude in 38 cases (55%) [8]. The enhanced ERG was characteristically associated with a reduced or absent visual evoked potential (VEP). Speculation regarding the physiological substrate of this phenomenon initially focused upon the existence of inhibitory centrifugal optic nerve fibres synapsing with the amacrine cells. It was later reported that 22% of a series of “supra-normal” ERGs were patients with optic nerve pathology [9].
We have been unable to identify any reports addressing this issue since the introduction of the ISCEV standards. The present study describes the conventional full-field ERG, pattern ERG and PVEP findings in a retrospectively ascertained group of patients with unilateral optic neuritis, the data having been acquired since the introduction of the ISCEV standards.
Methods
Patients with unilateral optic neuritis were retrospectively identified from the Moorfields Eye Hospital Electrophysiology Department database (between 1998 and 2010). Patients were excluded if they did not have ERG, PERG and PVEP performed to ISCEV standards; had known co-existing retinal disease; had evidence of bilateral optic nerve disease clinically or electrophysiologically, or had been seen acutely (<3 weeks). The diagnosis was made by a consultant neuro-ophthalmologist and was based on typical clinical findings such as a sudden onset of unilateral visual acuity loss, pain on eye movement, a relative afferent pupillary defect and colour vision deficiency [10]. Patients were only included if the clinical course and electrophysiological findings were consistent with a diagnosis of optic neuritis and it was their first episode. None of the patients had either the primary or secondary progressive type of MS. An Ethics Committee opinion was not required for this retrospective data review.
ERG, PERG and VEP incorporated the ISCEV standard recommendations [11–13]. After 25 min of dark adaptation, ERGs were recorded to white flash strengths of between 0.01 and 11.0 cd s m−2 (DA 0.01–DA 11.0, approx 0.6 log unit steps). After 10 min of light adaptation (30 cd m−2), generalised photopic cone system function was assessed by recording 30 Hz flicker (LA 30 Hz) and single flash cone ERGs (LA 3.0). Pattern ERGs evoked by high-contrast black and white checkerboard reversal were recorded using a field size of 15° × 10°; check size 45′; white luminance 100 cd s m−2, contrast ~95%; reversal rate 4.4 s−1. Pattern-reversal VEPs were elicited by 50 min checks in a field size of 13° × 10° using the same luminance and contrast parameters. Reversal rate was 2.2 s−1.
Regular calibration and service ensured that the stimulus parameters remained stable over the period of time covered by the study.
Results
Forty-six patients were identified, 63% of who were women, with an average age of 45 (range 23–68 years). Just over half (59%) of all patients carried a diagnosis of relapsing remitting MS as the cause of their optic neuritis. The Student’s t-test was used to compare the ERG, PERG and PVEP data from the clinically affected eyes with those from the fellow eye. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. The electrophysiological data are summarised in Table 1. See Fig. 1 for a representative example.
ERG
Sixteen of the 46 patients had higher ERG DA 0.01 b-wave amplitudes in the clinically affected eye; only 5/16 showed a difference of greater than 20 μV and in no case did the magnitude of the inter-ocular asymmetry reach 30%, the criterion for an abnormal inter-ocular asymmetry within our laboratory. Of the remaining patients, 24 patients had lower amplitude ERGs in the affected eye; 6 showed no asymmetry. For the brighter flash ERGs, only 6 patients had an ERG DA 11.0 b-wave amplitude >550 μV, with 3 recordings being >600 μV. In the cone system, there were no abnormalities of LA 3.0 30 Hz flicker, nor the LA 3.0 ERG.
Overall, there was no statistically significant inter-ocular asymmetry in any ERG parameter. Further, there was no statistically significant difference between the ERGs of the patients with and without a diagnosis of MS.
PERG
The PERG N95 amplitude was significantly lower in the clinically affected eyes (P < 0.001). See Fig. 1. Nine patients had a mild abnormality of P50 (1.5–1.9 μV) in the clinically affected eye. No P50 abnormalities were found in the fellow eye. There was no significant difference in P50 between eyes (P = 0.09) and between patients with and without MS (P = 0.3).
PVEP
The mean PVEP P100 component peak time was 134.9 ms (SD 13.2) in the affected eye compared with a mean value of 108.5 ms in the unaffected fellow eye (P < 0.001). The mean P100 amplitude in the affected eye was 6.4 μV (SD 4.0) compared with 10.4 μV (SD 5.1) in the fellow eye (P < 0.001). The mean PVEP P100 peak time in the clinically affected eye was 140 ms in those patients with MS, compared with 125 ms in those without MS (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in peak time between the clinically unaffected eye in those patients with and without MS (P = 0.12).
Discussion
It has been suggested by previous authors that ERG amplitudes are higher in eyes with optic nerve dysfunction. The present study of patients with unilateral optic nerve dysfunction, with or without a diagnosis of MS, is unable to confirm those observations.
No statistically significant difference was present in any ISCEV Standard ERG parameter between the ON eyes and the fellow eyes, and no patient showed an inter-ocular asymmetry of >30%. The possibility that subclinical optic nerve dysfunction in the fellow eye may dampen any asymmetry in the ERG was minimised by confining the study to patients with unilateral symptoms and a unilateral PVEP abnormality. Although MS is a systemic disease that may have separate subclinical effects in the retina of the ON and fellow eyes [14], there was no difference in the mean ERG and PERG values between the eyes in those patients with and without MS. There are some reports of reduced b-wave amplitudes in optic neuritis patients with and without MS, but no difference in a-wave amplitudes or peak-time [15, 16]. However, one of those studies [15] did not record ISCEV Standard ERGs, using surface electrodes, and the other [16] only performed photopic ERGs and found “reduction” in both affected and unaffected eyes compared with a normal control group. No such changes were observed in the present study population.
Auerbach and colleagues [8, 9, 17] used a b-wave cut-off value of 600 μV to define a “supernormal ERG” when they reported supernormal ERGs in optic nerve disease. Notwithstanding the need for each laboratory to establish its own normal ranges, that series was ascertained prior to the introduction of ISCEV Standard ERGs making direct comparison with more modern data even more difficult. The present study utilised the “suggested” DA 11.0 response and a value of >600 μV is not supernormal in a young person. By laboratory normals, no individual patient in the present series had a supernormal ERG.
It has long been established that a PERG abnormality confined to the N95 component can occur in optic nerve disease [18, 19] There are two main components of the PERG, N95, which arises in the retinal ganglion cells, and P50, approximately 70% of which arises in the retinal ganglion cells and which is “driven” by the macular photoreceptors [20, 21]. A large study reported that approximately one-third of 382 eyes with optic nerve demyelination had an abnormal N95:P50 ratio [22]. As unilateral disease was an inclusion criterion for the present study, the finding of a statistically significant difference in the PERG N95 component between the ON and fellow eyes was predictable, reflecting retrograde degeneration to the central retinal ganglion cells consequent upon the optic nerve insult. In addition, the present study did not allow the inclusion of patients with disease of less than 3 weeks duration in an attempt to ensure that the P50 data were not inappropriately affected by the transient reduction in that component that occurs in an acute ON [22], and which suggests macular involvement. Of clinical relevance, the degree of initial P50 abnormality in that earlier study related to final visual outcome and thus had prognostic value.
More recently, the photopic negative response (PhNR) has been associated with retinal ganglion cell function, and changes in the PhNR have been described in patients with optic atrophy [23]. A recent publication addressing the focal PhNR in optic neuritis [24] found attenuation of the focal macular ERG a- and b-wave amplitudes at onset of ON which had recovered by 6 months. The authors suggested that “inflammation at the onset of optic neuritis results in dysfunction extending to at least the inner nuclear layers, with recovery in all but the retinal ganglion cell layers”. The PERG data in acute optic neuritis, referred to above, [22] question that interpretation. That study also reported reversible macular involvement as part of acute optic neuritis, with recovery of PERG P50 paralleling that of the more recent focal macular ERG a- and b-waves, but also suggested, however, that there is direct ganglion cell involvement due to retrograde degeneration following the initial optic nerve insult rather than an acute trans-retinal inflammatory process with failure of ganglion cell recovery. That had previously been suggested by recordings from a patient examined, serendipitously, during the developing stage of an optic neuritis [25]. There has been recent confirmation of the possibility of macular involvement in optic neuritis, demonstrated both by optical coherence tomography (OCT) and by multi-focal ERG [26].
The present study, being retrospective, did not incorporate the most recent developments in imaging, particularly high resolution OCT. It will clearly be highly relevant and of great interest for future studies to examine high-resolution OCT data to determine any possible structural changes that may occur in conjunction with the functional changes demonstrated by electrophysiology, particularly given those recent observations of possible macular OCT changes in optic neuritis [26]. Reviews of OCT data in optic nerve disease have appeared [27–30], as have studies on the relationship between structure and function in optic neuritis [31–33].
The patients in this cohort were older, and contained a higher proportion of men (37% vs. 23% in the Optic Neuritis Treatment Trial [10]), than might be anticipated in a population of optic neuritis patients. This is likely to relate to referral patterns; in the “classical” young female patient with symptoms of sudden monocular visual loss accompanied by retrobulbar pain made worse on lateral eye movement, it is unlikely that electrophysiological confirmation would be requested. Nonetheless, the data should still be applicable to a more general series. Given a mean follow-up of 5 years, the incidence of 59% of patients with ON having a diagnosis of MS established prior to the final discharge letter is within the expected range [34].
To conclude, ISCEV Standard ERG data from eyes with optic neuritis did not significantly differ either from the uninvolved fellow eye or from normal, in contrast to previous studies performed prior to the introduction of the ISCEV Standard for ERG. Also in contrast to those early reports, none of the patients in the present series has a “supernormal” ERG.
References
Halliday AM, McDonald WI, Mushin J (1972) Delayed visual evoked response in optic neuritis. Lancet 1:982–985
Halliday AM, McDonald WI, Mushin J (1973) Visual evoked response in diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 4:661–664
Holder G (1991) Multiple sclerosis. In: Heckenlively JR, Arden G (eds) Principles and practice of clinical elecrophysiology of vision. Mosby Year Book, St Louis, pp 797–805
Holder GE, Gale RP, Acheson JF, Robson AG (2009) Electrodiagnostic assessment in optic nerve disease. Curr Opin Neurol 22:3–10
Lightman S, McDonald WI, Bird AC, Francis DA, Hoskins A, Batchelor JR, Halliday AM (1987) Retinal venous sheathing in optic neuritis. Its significance for the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis. Brain 110:405–414
Forooghian F, Sproule M, Westall C, Gordon L, Jirawuthiworavong G, Shimazaki K, O’Connor P (2006) Electroretinographic abnormalities in multiple sclerosis: possible role for retinal autoantibodies. Doc Ophthalmol 113:123–132
Gills JP Jr (1966) Electroretinographic abnormalities and advanced multiple sclerosis. Invest Ophthalmol 5(6):555–559
Feinsod M, Auerbach E (1969) Changes in the electroretinogram (ERG) in lesions of the optic nerve. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 27:217
Feinsod M, Rowe H, Auerbach E (1971) Changes in the electroretinogram in patients with optic nerve lesions. Doc Ophthalmol 29:169–200
Beck RW, Cleary PA, Anderson MM Jr, Keltner JL, Shults WT, Kaufman DI, Buckley EG, Corbett JJ, Kupersmith MJ, Miller NR, Savino PJ, Guy JR, Trobe JD, McCrary JA III, Smith CH, Chrousos GA, Thompson HS, Katz BJ, Brodsky MC, Goodwin JA, Atwell CW, the Optic Neuritis Study Group* (1992) A randomized, controlled trial of corticosteroids in the treatment of acute optic neuritis. N Engl J Med 326:581–588
Marmor MF, Fulton AB, Holder GE, Miyake Y, Brigell M, Bach M (2009) ISCEV Standard for full-field clinical electroretinography (2008 update). Doc Ophthalmol 118:69–77
Holder GE, Brigell MG, Hawlina M, Meigen T, Vaegan, Bach M (2007) ISCEV standard for clinical pattern electroretinography–2007 update. Doc Ophthalmol 114:111–116
Odom JV, Bach M, Brigell M, Holder GE, McCulloch DL, Tormene AP, Vaegan (2010) ISCEV standard for clinical visual evoked potentials (2009 update). Doc Ophthalmol 120:111–119
Falsini B, Bardocci A, Porciatti V, Bolzani R, Piccardi M (1992) Macular dysfunction in multiple sclerosis revealed by steady-state flicker and pattern ERGs. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 82:53–59
Papakostopoulos D, Fotiou F, Hart JC, Banerji NK (1989) The electroretinogram in multiple sclerosis and demyelinating optic neuritis. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 74:1–10
Fotiou F, Koutlas E, Tsorlinis I, Dimitriades A, Fountoulakis K, Tsiptsios I, Sitzoglou K, Karampatakis V, Stangos N (1999) The value of neurophysiological and MRI assessment in demyelinating optic neuritis (DON). Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 39:397–404
Feinsod M, Rowe H, Auerbach E (1971) Enhanced retinal responses without signs of optic nerve involvement. Doc Ophthalmol 29:201–211
Holder GE (1987) Significance of abnormal pattern electroretinography in anterior visual pathway dysfunction. Br J Ophthalmol 71:166–171
Ryan S, Arden GB (1988) Electrophysiological discrimination between retinal and optic nerve disorders. Doc Ophthalmol 68:247–255
Viswanathan S, Frishman LJ, Robson JG (2000) The uniform field and pattern ERG in macaques with experimental glaucoma: removal of spiking activity. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 41:2797–2810
Holder GE (2004) Electrophysiological assessment of optic nerve disease. Eye (Lond) 18:1133–1143
Holder GE (2001) Pattern electroretinography (PERG) and an integrated approach to visual pathway diagnosis. Prog Retin Eye Res 20:531–561
Gotoh Y, Machida S, Tazawa Y (2004) Selective loss of the photopic negative response in patients with optic nerve atrophy. Arch Ophthalmol 122:341–346
Nakamura H, Miyamoto K, Yokota S, Ogino K, Yoshimura N (2011) Focal macular photopic negative response in patients with optic neuritis. Eye (Lond) 25:358–364
Holder GE (1991) The incidence of abnormal pattern electroretinography in optic nerve demyelination. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 78:18–26
Saidha S, Syc SB, Ibrahim MA, Eckstein C, Warner CV, Farrell SK, Oakley JD, Durbin MK, Meyer SA, Balcer LJ, Frohman EM, Rosenzweig JM, Newsome SD, Ratchford JN, Nguyen QD, Calabresi PA (2011) Primary retinal pathology in multiple sclerosis as detected by optical coherence tomography. Brain 134:518–533
Petzold A, de Boer JF, Schippling S, Vermersch P, Kardon R, Green A, Calabresi PA, Polman C (2010) Optical coherence tomography in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Neurol 9:921–932
Lamirel C, Newman NJ, Biousse V (2010) Optical coherence tomography (OCT) in optic neuritis and multiple sclerosis. Rev Neurol (Paris) 166:978–986
Heidary G, Rizzo JF 3rd (2010) Use of optical coherence tomography to evaluate papilledema and pseudopapilledema. Semin Ophthalmol 25:198–205
Savini G, Carbonelli M, Barboni P (2011) Spectral-domain optical coherence tomography for the diagnosis and follow-up of glaucoma. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 22:115–123
Parisi V (2003) Correlation between morphological and functional retinal impairment in patients affected by ocular hypertension, glaucoma, demyelinating optic neuritis and Alzheimer’s disease. Semin Ophthalmol 18:50–57
Klistorner A, Arvind H, Garrick R, Graham SL, Paine M, Yiannikas C (2010) Interrelationship of optical coherence tomography and multifocal visual-evoked potentials after optic neuritis. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 51:2770–2777
Almarcegui C, Dolz I, Pueyo V, Garcia E, Fernandez FJ, Martin J, Ara JR, Honrubia F (2010) Correlation between functional and structural assessments of the optic nerve and retina in multiple sclerosis patients. Neurophysiol Clin 40:129–135
The Optic Neuritis Study Group (1997) Visual function 5 years after optic neuritis: experience of the optic neuritis treatment trial. Arch Ophthalmol 115:1545–1552
Acknowledgments
We wish to thank the consultant neuro-ophthalmologists: Dr Gordon Plant, Mr James Acheson and Dr Ahmed Toosey. CF acknowledges the support of the Sydney Eye Hospital Alumni Travelling Fellowship award and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Ophthalmologists Eye Foundation Fellowship award. GEH acknowledges funding from the Foundation Fighting Blindness (USA) and the Alcon Research Institute. Also acknowledged is support from the Department of Health (UK) through an award made by the National Institute for Health Research to the Biomedical Research Centre for Ophthalmology at Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology.
Conflict of interest
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fraser, C.L., Holder, G.E. Electroretinogram findings in unilateral optic neuritis. Doc Ophthalmol 123, 173–178 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-011-9294-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-011-9294-x