Comparison of ERG signal-to-noise ratios in simultaneous recordings with skin electrodes and contact lens electrodes.

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Scott E Brodie, Promie Faruque, Jorge Pincay, Mohamed Sylla, Xuan Cui, Stephanie Choi, Karen Holopigian, Vivienne Greenstein
{"title":"Comparison of ERG signal-to-noise ratios in simultaneous recordings with skin electrodes and contact lens electrodes.","authors":"Scott E Brodie, Promie Faruque, Jorge Pincay, Mohamed Sylla, Xuan Cui, Stephanie Choi, Karen Holopigian, Vivienne Greenstein","doi":"10.1007/s10633-025-10003-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare signal-to-noise levels in ERG recordings obtained with contact lens electrodes and adhesive skin electrodes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>23 subjects were studied. Full-field ERGs were recorded according to ISCEV standards simultaneously with ERG-jet corneal contact lens electrodes and LKC Technologies Sensor Strip adhesive skin electrodes. B-wave amplitude or peak-to-peak amplitude was used as a measure of signal strength. Noise was estimated using the \" ± averaging method.\" Comparisons between signal strength, absolute noise levels, and signal-to-noise ratios between contact lens and skin electrodes were performed by linear regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Comparisons of signal strength for LA 3, 30-Hz, DA 0.01, and DA 3 responses, yielded regression coefficient ß values of 0.37, 0.39, 0.39, and 0.35, respectively. For the entire data set, the regression coefficient ß value was 0.36 (95% confidence limits 0.34 - 0.38). The grand average ERG noise for all ERG stimuli was 13.8 µV for contact lens electrodes and 13.0 µV for skin electrodes (not significant: p = 0.66 for paired t-test). For signal-to-noise ratios, regression ß coefficients for contact lens and adhesive skin electrodes for LA 3, 30-Hz, DA 0.01, and DA 3 stimuli were 0.25, 0.39, 0.50, and 0.36 respectively. The ß coefficient for the amalgamated data set was 0.33 (95% confidence limits 0.30- 0.36).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall ERG amplitudes obtained with skin electrodes were 1/3 those obtained with contact lens electrodes. Absolute noise levels were similar. Signal-to-noise levels with skin electrodes were 1/3 those seen with contact lens electrodes. Implications for signal-averaging in clinical applications are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":11207,"journal":{"name":"Documenta Ophthalmologica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Documenta Ophthalmologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-025-10003-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare signal-to-noise levels in ERG recordings obtained with contact lens electrodes and adhesive skin electrodes.

Methods: 23 subjects were studied. Full-field ERGs were recorded according to ISCEV standards simultaneously with ERG-jet corneal contact lens electrodes and LKC Technologies Sensor Strip adhesive skin electrodes. B-wave amplitude or peak-to-peak amplitude was used as a measure of signal strength. Noise was estimated using the " ± averaging method." Comparisons between signal strength, absolute noise levels, and signal-to-noise ratios between contact lens and skin electrodes were performed by linear regression.

Results: Comparisons of signal strength for LA 3, 30-Hz, DA 0.01, and DA 3 responses, yielded regression coefficient ß values of 0.37, 0.39, 0.39, and 0.35, respectively. For the entire data set, the regression coefficient ß value was 0.36 (95% confidence limits 0.34 - 0.38). The grand average ERG noise for all ERG stimuli was 13.8 µV for contact lens electrodes and 13.0 µV for skin electrodes (not significant: p = 0.66 for paired t-test). For signal-to-noise ratios, regression ß coefficients for contact lens and adhesive skin electrodes for LA 3, 30-Hz, DA 0.01, and DA 3 stimuli were 0.25, 0.39, 0.50, and 0.36 respectively. The ß coefficient for the amalgamated data set was 0.33 (95% confidence limits 0.30- 0.36).

Conclusions: Overall ERG amplitudes obtained with skin electrodes were 1/3 those obtained with contact lens electrodes. Absolute noise levels were similar. Signal-to-noise levels with skin electrodes were 1/3 those seen with contact lens electrodes. Implications for signal-averaging in clinical applications are discussed.

使用皮肤电极和隐形眼镜电极同时记录 ERG 信噪比的比较。
目的:比较接触镜电极和皮肤粘附电极获得的电刺激记录的信噪比。方法:对23例受试者进行研究。根据ISCEV标准记录全场眼电,同时记录眼电喷射角膜接触镜电极和LKC Technologies Sensor Strip皮肤粘附电极。b波振幅或峰对峰振幅被用作信号强度的度量。采用“±平均法”估计噪声。通过线性回归比较隐形眼镜和皮肤电极之间的信号强度、绝对噪声水平和信噪比。结果:la3、30 hz、DA 0.01和DA 3的信号强度比较,回归系数分别为0.37、0.39、0.39和0.35。对于整个数据集,回归系数为0.36(95%置信限为0.34 - 0.38)。所有ERG刺激的平均ERG噪声在隐形眼镜电极上为13.8µV,在皮肤电极上为13.0µV(配对t检验p = 0.66)。对于信噪比,在la3、30-Hz、DA 0.01和DA 3刺激下,隐形眼镜和粘附皮肤电极的回归系数分别为0.25、0.39、0.50和0.36。合并数据集的ß系数为0.33(95%置信限0.30- 0.36)。结论:皮肤电极测得的整体电刺激振幅为隐形眼镜电极测得的1/3。绝对噪音水平相似。皮肤电极的信噪比是隐形眼镜电极的三分之一。讨论了信号平均在临床应用中的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Documenta Ophthalmologica
Documenta Ophthalmologica 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
21.40%
发文量
46
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Documenta Ophthalmologica is an official publication of the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision. The purpose of the journal is to promote the understanding and application of clinical electrophysiology of vision. Documenta Ophthalmologica will publish reviews, research articles, technical notes, brief reports and case studies which inform the readers about basic and clinical sciences related to visual electrodiagnosis and means to improve diagnosis and clinical management of patients using visual electrophysiology. Studies may involve animals or humans. In either case appropriate care must be taken to follow the Declaration of Helsinki for human subject or appropriate humane standards of animal care (e.g., the ARVO standards on Animal Care and Use).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信