ArticleDocumenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology2012
Establishing baseline rod electroretinogram values in achromatopsia and cone dystrophy.
Article in Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application of Electrophysiology in Non-Macular Inherited Retinal Dystrophies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Differences in ocular findings in two siblings: one with complete and other with incomplete achromatopsia.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2017Observational
- The morphology of human rod ERGs obtained by silent substitution stimulation.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2017Article
- Disease progression in autosomal dominant cone-rod dystrophy caused by a novel mutation (D100G) in the GUCA1A gene.Documenta ophthalmologica. Advances in ophthalmology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo establish the normal range of values for rod-isolated b-wave amplitudes in achromatopsia and cone dystrophies.
methodsWe reviewed charts of 112 patients with various types of cone dystrophy, and compared their standardized electroretinographic rod b-wave amplitudes with age-matched normal controls. Twenty-six patients had known mutations in achromatopsia and cone dystrophy genes, while 53 were characterized by their inheritance pattern since they had yet to have their gene identified. Visual acuity information and scotomata were documented.
resultsWe found that patients with achromatopsia and cone dystrophy had rod b-wave amplitudes that were significantly lower than age-matched controls, but found no evidence of rod amplitude progression nor loss of peripheral visual fields in the study group.
conclusionsWe found that cone dystrophy patients of all types had depressed rod-isolated ERGs across the board. If typical diagnostic criteria are used, these patients might be considered to have "abnormal" rod-isolated electroretinographic values, and might be called "cone-rod dystrophy", even though the waveforms are stable for years. Patients with cone-rod dysfunction patterns on ERG can be better understood by also performing kinetic (Goldmann) visual fields, which will help to distinguish cone dystrophies from progressive cone-rod dystrophies by central scotomata size and progression over time in many forms of cone-rod dystrophy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22903242What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.