Literature DB >> 10708226

Objective VEP perimetry in glaucoma: asymmetry analysis to identify early deficits.

S L Graham1, A I Klistorner, J R Grigg, F A Billson.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The multifocal visual evoked potential (VEP) shows markedly symmetrical responses between the two eyes of control subjects. Patients with glaucoma and patients considered at high risk for glaucoma were examined to determine if VEP asymmetry could be identified and used for diagnosis and detection of early damage.
METHODS: Multifocal pattern VEP recordings were performed using a single channel bipolar occipital electrode position and the Visual Evoked Response Imaging System (VERIS). There were 125 subjects: 24 control subjects, 70 patients with glaucoma, and 31 patients considered at high risk for glaucoma. A between-eye relative asymmetry coefficient (RAC) was determined for each of the 60 test points in the VEP field. The RAC for patients with glaucoma and patients considered at risk for glaucoma were compared with values from control subjects. Correlation between Humphrey thresholds and RAC scores was performed.
RESULTS: Patients with glaucoma and patients considered at risk for glaucoma both showed significantly larger mean quadrant RAC values. When point by point analysis was performed, 69 out of 70 scotomas were identified with a cluster of at least 3 points of P < 0.05. For those considered at high risk for glaucoma, 10 out of 31 patients had abnormal areas in the VEP field. There was a strong correlation (r = 0.82) between quadrantic RAC mean values and Humphrey quadrant threshold scores in an asymmetric glaucoma subgroup. Abnormal VEP responses were identified in parts of the visual field that were still normal on perimetry.
CONCLUSIONS: Asymmetry analysis correctly identifies patients with glaucomatous field loss and shows abnormalities in many patients considered at high risk for glaucoma who still have normal fields. Asymmetry analysis is able to identify objectively the extent of glaucomatous damage and may be able to detect changes before subjective field loss occurs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10708226     DOI: 10.1097/00061198-200002000-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Glaucoma        ISSN: 1057-0829            Impact factor:   2.503


  41 in total

1.  Multifocal ERG and VEP responses and visual fields: comparing disease-related changes.

Authors:  D C Hood; X Zhang
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 2.379

2.  Quantifying the benefits of additional channels of multifocal VEP recording.

Authors:  Donald C Hood; Xian Zhang; Jenny E Hong; Candice S Chen
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 2.379

3.  A signal-to-noise analysis of multifocal VEP responses: an objective definition for poor records.

Authors:  Xian Zhang; Donald C Hood; Candice S Chen; Jenny E Hong
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 2.379

4.  Diagnostic value of multifocal VEP using cross-validation and noise reduction in glaucoma research.

Authors:  Thomas Lindenberg; Andrea Peters; Folkert K Horn; Berthold Lausen; Matthias Korth
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-04-15       Impact factor: 3.117

5.  Reproducibility of multifocal VEP latency using different stimulus presentations.

Authors:  Prema Sriram; Alexander Klistorner; Hemamalini Arvind; Stuart L Graham
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-06-06       Impact factor: 2.379

6.  Determining abnormal interocular latencies of multifocal visual evoked potentials.

Authors:  Donald C Hood; Xian Zhang; Christopher Rodarte; E Bo Yang; Nitin Ohri; Brad Fortune; Chris A Johnson
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 2.379

7.  The effect of fixation instability on the multifocal VEP.

Authors:  Michael Menz; Erich Sutter; Momoyo Menz
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 2.379

8.  Multifocal visual evoked responses to dichoptic stimulation using virtual reality goggles: Multifocal VER to dichoptic stimulation.

Authors:  Hemamalini Arvind; Alexander Klistorner; Stuart L Graham; John R Grigg
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-06-22       Impact factor: 2.379

9.  Structural and functional assessment of the macular region in patients with glaucoma.

Authors:  F N Kanadani; D C Hood; T M Grippo; B Wangsupadilok; N Harizman; V C Greenstein; J M Liebmann; R Ritch
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-08-09       Impact factor: 4.638

10.  Detecting glaucoma with RADAAR: the Bridlington Eye Assessment Project.

Authors:  M J Hawker; S A Vernon; C L Tattersall; H S Dua
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 4.638

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.