Back to Journals » Clinical Ophthalmology » Volume 7

Macular dysfunction in drusen maculopathy assessed with multifocal electroretinogram and optical coherence tomography

Authors Garcia-Garcia JG, Ruiz-Moreno JM, Holm K, Andreasson S, Lövestam-Adrian M

Received 16 October 2012

Accepted for publication 27 November 2012

Published 1 July 2013 Volume 2013:7 Pages 1303—1309


Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 5

Jose G Garcia-Garcia,1,2 Jose M Ruiz-Moreno,1 Kristina Holm,2 Sten Andréasson,2 Monica Lövestam-Adrian2

1Department of Ophthalmology, University of Castilla La Mancha, Albacete, Spain; 2Department of Ophthalmology, University of Lund, Lund, Sweden

Purpose: To study the relationship between macular function assessed by multifocal electroretinogram (mfERG) and morphological changes evaluated with optical coherence tomography (OCT) and fundus photography in patients with drusen maculopathy.
Methods: Ten patients (age 71 ± 5 years) with drusen maculopathy were compared to fifteen healthy control patients (age 67 ± 7 years). One eye per patient was examined with OCT, color fundus pictures, and mfERG (103 hexagons) recorded in nine areas corresponding to the nine areas of the OCT retinal map. Drusen density for every separated area was registered.
Results: All nine areas in the maculopathy group demonstrated prolonged implicit time compared to healthy controls; the mean value for the maculopathy group was 31.3 milliseconds (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 30.9–31.6) vs 27.9 milliseconds (95% CI: 27.5–28.2; P = 0.006) for the control group. The amplitude in the foveal area was lower in the maculopathy group; the mean value for the maculopathy group was 25.1 nV/deg2 (95% CI: 18.4–31.7) vs 33.9 nV/deg2 (95% CI: 27–40.9; P = 0.03) for the control group. mfERG in the maculopathy group demonstrated no differences in areas with or without drusen. There was no correlation between the retinal thickness assessed with OCT and the mfERG response.
Conclusion: Eyes with drusen maculopathy demonstrated functional changes compared to healthy controls evaluated with mfERG. Drusen seems to be associated with general macular dysfunction.

Keywords: multifocal electroretinogram, drusen maculopathy, optical coherence tomography, macular dysfunction

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]


Readers of this article also read:

Green synthesis of water-soluble nontoxic polymeric nanocomposites containing silver nanoparticles

Prozorova GF, Pozdnyakov AS, Kuznetsova NP, Korzhova SA, Emel’yanov AI, Ermakova TG, Fadeeva TV, Sosedova LM

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2014, 9:1883-1889

Published Date: 16 April 2014

Methacrylic-based nanogels for the pH-sensitive delivery of 5-Fluorouracil in the colon

Ashwanikumar N, Kumar NA, Nair SA, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:5769-5779

Published Date: 15 November 2012

A novel preparation method for silicone oil nanoemulsions and its application for coating hair with silicone

Hu Z, Liao M, Chen Y, Cai Y, Meng L, Liu Y, Lv N, Liu Z, Yuan W

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:5719-5724

Published Date: 12 November 2012

Cross-linked acrylic hydrogel for the controlled delivery of hydrophobic drugs in cancer therapy

Deepa G, Thulasidasan AK, Anto RJ, Pillai JJ, Kumar GS

International Journal of Nanomedicine 2012, 7:4077-4088

Published Date: 27 July 2012

Crystallization after intravitreal ganciclovir injection

Pitipol Choopong, Nattaporn Tesavibul, Nattawut Rodanant

Clinical Ophthalmology 2010, 4:709-711

Published Date: 14 July 2010