Two cases of unilateral cone-rod dysfunction with negative electroretinograms
Documenta Ophthalmologica, ISSN: 1573-2622, Vol: 139, Issue: 3, Page: 247-256
2019
- 3Citations
- 10Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Purpose: To report the findings in two patients with unilateral cone-rod dysfunction with the a-wave larger than the b-wave, i.e., negative-type, full-field electroretinogram (ERG). Methods: Standard ophthalmological examinations were performed including the medical history, measurements of the best-corrected visual acuity and intraocular pressures, slit-lamp biomicroscopy, ophthalmoscopy, spectral-domain optical coherence tomography, fundus autofluorescence, fluorescein angiography, and perimetry. ERG examinations were carried out with the ISCEV standard. Immunoblot analysis using the patient’s sera was performed to determine the presence of the recoverin1 antibody. Results: The common findings in these two patients were: unilateral, male sex, sudden onset of photophobia or a reduction in the vision at an advanced age, preserved visual acuity, no complaint of night blindness, normal fundus appearance, negative-type dark-adapted 3.0 ERGs with reduced a-wave amplitudes, absent light-adapted 3.0 ERGs, and very reduced but recordable dark-adapted 0.01 ERGs. In addition, the multifocal ERGs in all areas except that in a hexagonal area within a 2.5° radius of the fovea were very reduced. Patients with similar findings have been reported earlier, but the subnormal a-wave of the dark-adapted 3.0 ERGs and extensive morphological alterations of the retina in the posterior pole in the OCT images were different from those of the reported patients. The OCT images showed an indistinct interdigitation zone and discontinuous ellipsoid zone. Anti-recoverin antibodies were not detected. Conclusions: Negative ERGs with severely reduced cone and rod components suggest that both the cone and rod bipolar cell visual pathways may be disturbed. Slightly decreased a-wave suggests minor abnormality of photoreceptors. It is important to determine whether these patients represent a new clinical entity or a phenotypic variation of an already described retinal disorder.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85075101129&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10633-019-09711-9; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31375969; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10633-019-09711-9; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10633-019-09711-9; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10633-019-09711-9
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know