advertisement
Abstract #108729 Published in IGR 23-4
Pattern Electroretinogram in Ocular Hypertension, Glaucoma Suspect and Early Manifest Glaucoma Eyes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Gallo Afflitto G; Chou TH; Swaminathan SS; Aiello F; Gedde SJ; Nucci C; Porciatti VOphthalmology science 2023; 3: 100322
TOPIC: To provide standardized confidence limits of the transient pattern electroretinogram (tPERG) P50 and N95 and steady state pattern electroretinogram (ssPERG) amplitudes in normal controls as compared to ocular hypertension (OHT), glaucoma suspect (GS), or early manifest glaucoma (EMG) eyes. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The identification of standardized confidence limits in the context of pattern electroretinogram (PERG) might overcome the high intrinsic variability of the measure, and it might lead to a more intuitive understanding of the results as well as to an easier comparison of data from multiple tests, sites, and operators. METHODS: The study protocol was prospectively registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (ID: CRD42022370032). A literature search was conducted on PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus. Studies comparing PERG raw data in normal control eyes as compared to OHT, GS, or EMG were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence quality assessment tool. The main outcome was the P50, N95, and ssPERG amplitude difference between the control and the study groups' eyes. The standardized mean difference was calculated as a measure of the effect size for the primary outcome. A subanalysis was conducted based on the type of electrodes adopted for the PERG measurements (invasive vs. noninvasive). RESULTS: Of the 4580 eligible papers, only 23 were included (1754 eyes). Statistically significant amplitude differences were found in the P50, N95, and ssPERG amplitudes between normal controls and OHT, GS, and EMG eyes. The highest standardized mean difference values were observed in the ssPERG amplitude in all 3 sets of comparison. The subanalysis did not reveal any statistically significant differences between invasive and noninvasive recording strategies. CONCLUSIONS: The use of standardized values as the main outcome measures in the context of the PERG data analysis is a valid approach, normalizing several confounding factors which have affected the clinical utility of PERG both for individual patients and in clinical trials. Steady state PERG apparently better discriminates diseased eyes compared to tPERG. The adoption of skin-active electrodes is able to adequately discriminate between healthy and diseased statuses. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURES: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.
Full article
