S Xu1, D Meyer, S Yoser, D Mathews, J L Elfervig. 1. Crippled Children Vitreoretinal Research Foundation and the University of Tennessee, Department of Ophthalmology, Memphis, Tennessee, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study the pattern visual evoked potential (P-VEP) in the diagnosis of functional visual loss. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study of observational case series. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-two subjects whose best corrected visual acuity (VA) was 20/50 or worse, with or without visual field defect, and whose visual abnormalities could not be explained by the findings of ophthalmologic and neurologic examination were included in this study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: To compare the P-VEP estimated acuity to the initial subjective VA and to the best-performed VA. RESULTS: Seventy-two subjects with functional visual loss had normal P-VEPs. The initial subjective VA was 20/50 in 9 subjects and < or =20/200 in 42 subjects. After clinical examination and reassurance, the best-performed VA was > or =20/50 in 53 subjects and < or =20/200 in 8 subjects. The discrepancy between the P-VEP estimated acuity and the best-performed VA was less than 3 lines of Snellen acuity in 63 of 72 (87.5%) subjects and more than 4 lines in 6 subjects. These six subjects were three women with loss of vision of unknown origin and three men with injury-related visual loss. CONCLUSIONS: P-VEP has the advantage of objectively predicting VA and is a useful test in the diagnosis of functional visual loss.
OBJECTIVE: To study the pattern visual evoked potential (P-VEP) in the diagnosis of functional visual loss. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study of observational case series. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy-two subjects whose best corrected visual acuity (VA) was 20/50 or worse, with or without visual field defect, and whose visual abnormalities could not be explained by the findings of ophthalmologic and neurologic examination were included in this study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: To compare the P-VEP estimated acuity to the initial subjective VA and to the best-performed VA. RESULTS: Seventy-two subjects with functional visual loss had normal P-VEPs. The initial subjective VA was 20/50 in 9 subjects and < or =20/200 in 42 subjects. After clinical examination and reassurance, the best-performed VA was > or =20/50 in 53 subjects and < or =20/200 in 8 subjects. The discrepancy between the P-VEP estimated acuity and the best-performed VA was less than 3 lines of Snellen acuity in 63 of 72 (87.5%) subjects and more than 4 lines in 6 subjects. These six subjects were three women with loss of vision of unknown origin and three men with injury-related visual loss. CONCLUSIONS: P-VEP has the advantage of objectively predicting VA and is a useful test in the diagnosis of functional visual loss.
Authors: Fatih C Gundogan; Fatih M Mutlu; H Ibrahim Altinsoy; Ahmet Tas; Oguzhan Oz; Gungor Sobaci Journal: Int Ophthalmol Date: 2010-04-08 Impact factor: 2.031
Authors: Vikki A McBain; Anthony G Robson; Chris R Hogg; Graham E Holder Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 2006-11-17 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Ruth Hamilton; Michael S Bradnam; Gordon N Dutton; Anna L Lai Chooi Yan; Tim E Lavy; I Livingstone; Alison M Mackay; Jane R Mackinnon Journal: Doc Ophthalmol Date: 2012-12-01 Impact factor: 2.379
Authors: Subahari Raviskanthan; Sydney Wendt; Peter M Ugoh; Peter W Mortensen; Heather E Moss; Andrew G Lee Journal: Surv Ophthalmol Date: 2021-03-15 Impact factor: 6.197