Alcohol- and light-induced electro-oculographic responses: variability and clinical utility

A meta-analysis of clinical electro-oculography values

BACKGROUND

The aim of the meta-analysis was to derive a range of mean normal clinical electrooculogram (EOG) values from a systematic review of published EOG studies that followed the guidelines of the ISCEV standard for clinical electro-oculography.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed using four relevant databases limited to peer-reviewed articles in English between 1967 and February 2017. Studies reporting clinical EOG or FO normal values were included when the report used a standard 30° horizontal saccade, a retinal luminance of between 100 and 250 cd m^-2, and had > 10 subjects in their normative values. The search identified 1145 articles after duplicates were removed with subsequent screening of the abstracts excluding a further 1098, resulting in 47 full-text articles that were then assessed by the author (PC) with a final nine articles meeting the inclusion criteria. An overall effect estimate using inverse variance-weighted meta-analysis was performed to estimate the mean values for the light peak/dark trough ratio (LP:DT ratio) (dilated and undilated), the time to the LP, the amplitude of the LP, dark trough (DT) and the fast oscillation (FO) peak-to-trough ratio from the included studies.

RESULTS

The mean dilated LP:DT ratio was 2.35 (95% CI 2.28-2.42); undilated LP:DT ratio was 2.37 (95% CI 2.28-2.45); LP amplitude was 835 (95% CI 631-1039) µV and the mean time to the LP being 8.2 (95% CI 7.7-8.7) min. The mean DT amplitude was 358 (95% CI 292-424) µV, and the mean FO peak-to-trough ratio was 1.13 (95% CI 1.11-1.16). The results of the LP/DT ratio are drawn from studies with a mean ± standard deviation (SD) age of 34.08 ± 12.93 years for dilated and 33.65 ± 12.28 years for undilated LP/DT ratios.

CONCLUSIONS

The meta-analysis of EOG studies has generated a reference range of normal mean values for clinicians to refer to when using the ISCEV clinical EOG. It provides a potential method to generate similar data sets from published normal values in related visual electrophysiology tests.

Light and alcohol evoked electro-oculograms in cystic fibrosis

Cystic fibrosis (CF) is caused by a defect in the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) which is a chloride channel. CFTR is expressed in the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) where it is believed to be important in generating the fast oscillations (FOs) and potentially contributing to the light-electro-oculogram (EOG). The role of CFTR in the alcohol-EOG is unknown. We recruited six individuals with CF (three homozygotes for Delta508 and three heterozygous for Delta508) and recorded the light- and alcohol-EOGs as well as the FOs and compared them to a control group. The results showed that in the CF group the amplitude of the alcohol- and light-EOGs were normal. However, the time to peak of the light- and alcohol-rises were significantly faster than in the control group. We conclude that CFTR is not primarily responsible for the alcohol- or light-rises but is involved in altering the timing of these responses. The FOs showed differences between the homozygotes, heterozygotes and the controls. The amplitudes were significantly higher and the time to the dark troughs were significantly slower in the heterozygote group compared to both controls and the homozygotes. In contrast, the homozygotes did not differ in either amplitude or the timing of the FOs compared to the controls.

Alcohol- and light-induced electro-oculographic responses in age-related macular degeneration & central serous chorioretinopathy. alcohol- and light-induced EOG responses in ARMD & CSC

The non-photic electro-oculographic (EOG) response induced by alcohol has been proposed as an indicator of retinal pigment epithelial (RPE) integrity, and reported to be abnormal in age-related macular degeneration (ARMD). To evaluate this proposal, we have measured the alcohol-EOG as well as the ISCEV-standard EOG in patients with ARMD (n=11 patients, 4 eyes with drusen, 8 eyes with 'dry' and 7 eyes with 'wet' lesions) and central serous chorioretinopathy (CSC, n=11 patients, 7 eyes with active and 6 eyes with inactive lesions), compared with 29 normal controls. We recorded the alcohol-induced EOG response after a single oral administration of ethanol at 160 mg/kg, followed by an ISCEV-standard EOG. Blood alcohol levels were monitored with a breath analyzer. We found that neither the alcohol-EOG nor the light-induced EOG response showed any difference between either ARMD or CSC patients and normal controls. Nor was there difference among eyes of different ARMD or CSC subgroups. In addition, blood alcohol concentrations near the time of the alcohol-EOG peak showed no obvious relationship with peak/baseline ratios. These data suggest that neither the alcohol- nor the light-induced EOG is a sensitive indicator of these diseases.