Abstract
To compare the ability of the multifocal electroretinogram (mfERG) and frequency domain optical coherence tomography (fdOCT) to detect retinal abnormalities. A total of 198 eyes (100 patients) were referred by neuro-ophthalmologists to rule out a retinal etiology of visual impairment. All patients were evaluated with static automated perimetry (SAP) (Humphrey Visual Field Analyzer; Zeiss Meditec), mfERG (Veris, EDI) and fdOCT (3D-OCT 1000, Topcon). The mfERG was performed with 103 scaled hexagons and procedures conforming to ISCEV standards (Hood DC et al. (2008) Doc Ophthalmol 116(1):1-11). The fdOCT imaging included horizontal and vertical line scans through the fovea. Local mfERG and fdOCT abnormalities were compared to local regions of visual field sensitivity loss measured with SAP and categorized as normal/inconclusive or abnormal. 146 eyes were categorized as normal retina on both fdOCT and mfERG. The retina of 52 eyes (36 patients) was categorized as abnormal based upon mfERG and/or fdOCT. Of this group, 25 eyes (20 patients) were abnormal on both tests. However, 20 eyes (13 patients) were abnormal on mfERG, while the fdOCT was normal/inconclusive; and 7 eyes (7 patients) had normal or inconclusive mfERG, but abnormal fdOCT. Considerable disagreement exists between these two methods for detection of retinal abnormalities. The mfERG tends to miss small local abnormalities that are detectable on the fdOCT. On the other hand, the fdOCT can appear normal in the face of clearly abnormal mfERG and SAP results. While improved imaging and analysis may show fdOCT abnormalities in some cases, in others early damage may not appear on structural tests.