Clinical Efficacy Of Portable Electroretinograms

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 < 0.001). Amplitude readings from the ERG-jet showed no differences with those acquired using the 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.