Literature DB >> 12901714

Pattern-onset stimulation boosts central multifocal VEP responses.

Michael B Hoffmann1, Sirko Straube, Michael Bach.   

Abstract

Multifocal visual evoked potentials (VEP) allow one to assess whether stimulation at specific visual field locations elicits cortical activity; it might therefore enable us to conduct objective visual field perimetry. However, due to the cortical folding, which differs markedly between subjects, a particular electroencephalogram generator may fail to project signal on some recording electrodes. This may lead to false alarms for potential scotomata. Here we compare pattern-reversal and pattern-onset stimulation in their efficacy to activate the visual cortex and recorded mfVEPs to 60 locations comprising a visual field of 44 degrees diameter. We report three main findings: (1) Pattern-onset compared to pattern-reversal enhances the amplitude by 30% for stimulation of the central visual field (<10 degrees radius), while evoking 30% less response in the periphery (>15 degrees ). (2) Although pattern-onset and pattern-reversal responses differ markedly in their eccentricity dependence, they have a similar topographical distribution. (3) By combining both stimuli, the number of false positives was reduced to less than 1.5% of the visual field locations tested. We conclude that pattern-onset and pattern-reversal activate identical visual cortical areas but target different neural mechanisms within these areas. Furthermore, pattern-onset stimulation greatly increases the sensitivity of the mfVEP to assess the cortical representation of the central 10 degrees of the visual field.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12901714     DOI: 10.1167/3.6.4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vis        ISSN: 1534-7362            Impact factor:   2.240


  7 in total

1.  The influence of defocus on multifocal visual evoked potentials.

Authors:  Christina Pieh; Michael B Hoffmann; Michael Bach
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-09-10       Impact factor: 3.117

2.  Motion-onset VEPs to translating, radial, rotating and spiral stimuli.

Authors:  Jan Kremlácek; Miroslav Kuba; Zuzana Kubová; Jana Chlubnová
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 2.379

3.  [Early latency in pattern-reversal and flash mfVEP].

Authors:  J D Unterlauft; T Meigen
Journal:  Ophthalmologe       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 1.059

4.  Improving the quality of multifocal visual evoked potential results by calculating multiple virtual channels.

Authors:  Babac A E Mazinani; Till D Waberski; Andreas W A Weinberger; Peter Walter; Gernot F Roessler
Journal:  Jpn J Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 2.447

5.  Comparison of the reliability of multifocal visual evoked cortical potentials generated by pattern reversal and pattern pulse stimulation.

Authors:  G S Souza; H B Schakelford; A L A Moura; B D Gomes; D F Ventura; M E C Fitzgerald; L C L Silveira
Journal:  Braz J Med Biol Res       Date:  2012-07-12       Impact factor: 2.590

6.  Cortical responses elicited by luminance and compound stimuli modulated by pseudo-random sequences: comparison between normal trichromats and congenital red-green color blinds.

Authors:  Bárbara B O Risuenho; Letícia Miquilini; Eliza Maria C B Lacerda; Luiz Carlos L Silveira; Givago S Souza
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-01-28

7.  A Mixed-Lipid Emulsion Containing Fish Oil for the Parenteral Nutrition of Preterm Infants: No Impact on Visual Neuronal Conduction.

Authors:  Christoph Binder; Hannah Schned; Nicholas Longford; Eva Schwindt; Margarita Thanhaeuser; Alexandra Thajer; Katharina Goeral; Matteo Tardelli; David Berry; Lukas Wisgrill; David Seki; Angelika Berger; Katrin Klebermass-Schrehof; Andreas Repa; Vito Giordano
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2021-11-25       Impact factor: 5.717

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.