Adaptation time, electroretinography, and pupillography in healthy subjects
- 140 Downloads
To investigate the relationship between adaptation time and the parameters of electroretinography (ERG) and pupillography in healthy subjects.
Forty-six eyes of 23 healthy women (mean age 21.7 years) were enrolled. ERG and pupillography were tested in each of the right and left 23 eyes, respectively. ERG with a skin electrode was used to determine amplitude and implicit time by the records of rod-, flash-, cone-, and flicker-responses with white light (0.01–30 cd s/m2). Infrared pupillography was used to record the pupillary light reflex to 1-s stimulation of red light (100 cd/m2). Cone- and flicker- (rod-, flash- and pupil) responses were recorded after light (dark) adaptation at 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20 min.
Amplitude (µV) was significantly different between 1 min and ≥ 5 or ≥ 10 min after adaptation in b-wave of cone- or rod-response, respectively. Implicit time (ms) differed significantly between 1 min and ≥ 5 min after adaptation with b-wave of cone- and rod-response. There were significant differences between 1 min and ≥ 10 or ≥ 5 min after dark adaptation in parameter of minimum pupil diameter (mm) or constriction rate (%), respectively.
Cone-driven ERG can be recorded, even in 5 min of light adaptation time without any special light condition, whereas rod-driven ERG and pupillary response results can be obtained in 10 min or longer of dark adaptation time in complete darkness.
KeywordsLight adaptation Dark adaptation Adaptation time Electroretinography Pupillary response
The authors thank Yuuki Nakayama, Yousuke Horiuchi of Uni-hite corporation, for technical assistance with data collection; Robert E. Brandt, Founder, CEO, and CME, of MedEd Japan, for editing and formatting the manuscript. This study was supported by a grant from Kitasato University School of Allied Health Sciences Grant in-Aid for Research Project, Grant Number 2018-1041.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Statement of human rights
All research procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects in this study.
- 1.Hecht S (1920) The dark adaptation of the human eye. J Gen Physiol 2(5):499–517 PMID: 19871826 Google Scholar
- 2.Crawford BH (1947) Visual adaptation in relation to brief conditioning stimuli. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 134(875):283–302 PMID: 20292379 Google Scholar
- 3.Wald G, Clark AB (1937) Visual adaptation and chemistry of the rods. J Gen Physiol 21(1):93–105 PMID: 19873041 Google Scholar
- 6.Wang B, Shen C, Zhang L, Qi L, Yao L, Chen J, Yang G, Chen T, Zhan Z (2015) Dark adaptation-induced changes in rod, cone and intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cell (ipRGC) sensitivity differentially affect the pupil light response (PLR). Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 253(11):1997–2005. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-015-3137-5 Google Scholar
- 7.Fotiou F, Fountoulakis KN, Goulas A, Alexopoulos L, Palikaras A (2000) Automated standardized pupillometry with optical method for purposes of clinical practice and research. Clin Physiol 20(5):336–347Google Scholar
- 8.Schnitzler E-M, Baumeister M, Kohnen T (2000) Scotopic measurement of normal pupils: colvard versus video vision analyzer infrared pupillometer. J Cataract Refract Surg 26(6):859–866Google Scholar
- 10.Lorenz B, Strohmayr E, Zahn S, Friedburg C, Kramer M, Preising M, Stieger K (2012) Chromatic pupillometry dissects function of the three different light-sensitive retinal cell populations in RPE65 deficiency. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 53(9):5641–5652. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.12-9974 Google Scholar
- 15.Lisowska J, Lisowski L, Kelbsch C, Maeda F, Richter P, Kohl S, Zobor D, Strasser T, Stingl K, Zrenner E, Peters T, Wilhelm H, Fischer MD, Wilhelm B, RD-CURE Consortium (2017) Development of a chromatic pupillography protocol for the first gene therapy trial in patients with CNGA3-linked achromatopsia. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 58(2):1274–1282. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.16-20505 Google Scholar
- 16.Lawlor M, Quartilho A, Bunce C, Nathwani N, Dowse E, Kamal D, Gazzard G (2017) Patients with normal tension glaucoma have relative sparing of the relative afferent pupillary defect compared to those with open angle glaucoma and elevated intraocular pressure. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 58(12):5237–5241. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.17-21688 Google Scholar
- 18.Normann RA, Werblin FS (1974) Control of retinal sensitivity. I. Light and dark adaptation of vertebrate rods and cones. J Gen Physiol 63(1):37–61 PMID: 4359063 Google Scholar
- 19.Baylor DA, Nunn BJ, Schnapf JL (1984) The photocurrent, noise and spectral sensitivity of rods of the monkey Macaca fascicularis. J Physiol 357:575–607Google Scholar
- 21.Aguilar M, Stiles WS (1954) Saturation of the rod mechanism of the retina at high levels of stimulation. Opt Acta 1:59–65Google Scholar
- 22.Baker HD (1949) The course of foveal light adaptation measured by the threshold intensity increment. J Opt Soc Am 39(2):172–179Google Scholar
- 23.Yanagisawa Y, Yoshino H, Ishikawa S, Miyata M (2017) Chemical sensitivity and sick-building syndrome. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
- 24.Tsujisawa I, Mukuno K, Ishikawa S (1989) The pupillary change in the course of brain death. J Auton Nerv Syst 26:63–70 (in Japanese) Google Scholar
- 25.Lowenstein O (1955) Pupillary reflex shapes and topical clinical diagnosis. Neurology 5(9):631–644 PMID: 13253831 Google Scholar
- 28.Asakawa K, Ishikawa H, Uga S, Mashimo K, Shimizu K, Kondo M, Terasaki H (2015) Functional and morphological study of retinal photoreceptor cell degeneration in transgenic rabbits with a Pro347Leu rhodopsin mutation. Jpn J Ophthalmol 59(5):353–363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10384-015-0400-6 Google Scholar