Clinical Efficacy of Portable Electroretinograms

ABSTRACT

Purpose@#To compare electroretinogram (ERG) waveforms acquired using a portable flash/flicker ERG with skin electrodes (RETevalTM; LKC Technologies, Gaithersburg, MD, USA), a portable flash/flicker ERG with ERG-jet contact lens electrodes (Fabrinal SA, La Chaux-De-Fonds, Swiss), and a conventional full-field (Ganzfeld) ERG. @*Methods@#The left eyes of 30 volunteers with no general or ocular history were measured with a portable RETeval ERG, a portable ERG-jet system, and a conventional full-field ERG. Amplitudes and implicit times were compared among the measurements obtained using the three systems. @*Results@#The RETeval ERG generally showed a lower amplitude than that obtained using a conventional full-field ERG (all, p 0.1). @*Conclusions@#Given the differences in the readings from those obtained using a conventional full-field ERG, data from the portable ERG-RETeval type should be analyzed with caution. Notably, the portable ERG-jet showed no differences in its readings compared to those obtained using a conventional full-field ERG.