Literature DB >> 17310345

Predicting potential acuities in amblyopes: predicting post-therapy acuity in amblyopes.

William H Ridder1, Michael W Rouse.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Amblyopic patients, or their parents, often want to know the potential for success before committing to treatment. Recent reports have indicated that the pattern visual evoked potential (pVEP) can be used as a predictor of the success of amblyopia therapy. Unfortunately, these studies did not determine if acuity estimates from pVEPs could accurately predict the acuity post-treatment. Furthermore, pVEPs are not always practical to obtain because of the time necessary to acquire the data. Sweep VEPs (sVEP) offer the advantage of rapidly estimating visual acuity in amblyopic patients. In this retrospective study, the relationship between sVEP acuities measured pre-amblyopic therapy and Snellen acuities measured post-amblyopic therapy was determined.
METHODS: Seventeen patients with amblyopia were studied. Monocular sVEP and Snellen acuities were determined pre-amblyopic therapy and Snellen acuities were determined post-amblyopic therapy. An Enfant 4010 computer system was used to produce the stimuli, record the VEPs, and extrapolate the acuity. The stimuli were horizontally oriented, sine wave gratings (11 spatial frequencies from 2 to 24 cpd) with a contrast of 80%, counterphased at 7.5 Hz. Standard VEP recording techniques were employed. Therapy consisted of the full refractive correction and occlusion combined with active vision therapy.
RESULTS: The patients demonstrated a significant improvement in pre- to post-amblyopic therapy Snellen acuities (P < 0.00001). The intraclass correlation coefficient (r (i)) between the pre-therapy sVEP acuities and the post-therapy Snellen acuities was 0.73. A paired t-test did not find a significant difference between the two sets of data (P = 0.94). For the amblyopes in this study, the average difference (+/-SD) in the sVEP acuity estimate and the final Snellen visual acuity was +0.002 +/- 0.123 logMAR acuity lines.
CONCLUSION: The results indicate that pre-amblyopic therapy sVEP acuity can be a good predictor of post-amblyopic therapy Snellen acuity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17310345     DOI: 10.1007/s10633-007-9048-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0012-4486            Impact factor:   1.854


  50 in total

1.  Area-specific amblyopic effects in human occipitotemporal object representations.

Authors:  Y Lerner; P Pianka; B Azmon; H Leiba; C Stolovitch; A Loewenstein; M Harel; T Hendler; R Malach
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2003-12-04       Impact factor: 17.173

2.  Spatial frequency sweep pattern reversal VER acuity vs Snellen visual acuity: effect of optical defocus.

Authors:  O Katsumi; M Arai; R Wajima; S Denno; T Hirose
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Abnormal acuity development in infantile esotropia.

Authors:  S H Day; D A Orel-Bixler; A M Norcia
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  1988-02       Impact factor: 4.799

4.  Principal components analysis for source localization of VEPs in man.

Authors:  J Maier; G Dagnelie; H Spekreijse; B W van Dijk
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  The VER as a predictor of normal visual acuity in the adult human eye.

Authors:  T C Jenkins; W A Douthwaite; J E Peedle
Journal:  Ophthalmic Physiol Opt       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 3.117

6.  Changes in the binocular fixation patterns and the visually evoked potential in the treatment of esotropia with amblyopia.

Authors:  L M Wilcox; S Sokol
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1980-12       Impact factor: 12.079

7.  Efficacy of treatment modalities in refractive amblyopia.

Authors:  I Krumholtz; D FitzGerald
Journal:  J Am Optom Assoc       Date:  1999-06

8.  Randomized trial of treatment of amblyopia in children aged 7 to 17 years.

Authors:  Mitchell M Scheiman; Richard W Hertle; Roy W Beck; Allison R Edwards; Eileen Birch; Susan A Cotter; Earl R Crouch; Oscar A Cruz; Bradley V Davitt; Sean Donahue; Jonathan M Holmes; Don W Lyon; Michael X Repka; Nicholas A Sala; David I Silbert; Donny W Suh; Susanna M Tamkins
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2005-04

9.  A randomized trial of patching regimens for treatment of moderate amblyopia in children.

Authors:  Michael X Repka; Roy W Beck; Jonathan M Holmes; Eileen E Birch; Danielle L Chandler; Susan A Cotter; Richard W Hertle; Raymond T Kraker; Pamela S Moke; Graham E Quinn; Mitchell M Scheiman
Journal:  Arch Ophthalmol       Date:  2003-05

10.  Frontoparietal activity with minimal decision and control.

Authors:  Nicholas Hon; Russell A Epstein; Adrian M Owen; John Duncan
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-09-20       Impact factor: 6.167

View more
  10 in total

1.  Reliability of acuities determined with the sweep visual evoked potential (sVEP).

Authors:  William H Ridder; Anna Tong; Theresa Floresca
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-01-20       Impact factor: 2.379

2.  A comparison of contrast sensitivity and sweep visual evoked potential (sVEP) acuity estimates in normal humans.

Authors:  William H Ridder
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-08-14       Impact factor: 2.379

3.  Comparison of the efficacies of patching and penalization therapies for the treatment of amblyopia patients.

Authors:  Cemalettin Cabi; Isil Bahar Sayman Muslubas; Ayse Yesim Aydin Oral; Metin Dastan
Journal:  Int J Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-06-18       Impact factor: 1.779

4.  Comparing enfant and PowerDiva sweep visual evoked potential (sVEP) acuity estimates.

Authors:  William H Ridder; Bradley S Waite; Timothy F Melton
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-08-24       Impact factor: 2.379

5.  Visual evoked potential-based acuity assessment: overestimation in amblyopia.

Authors:  Yaroslava Wenner; Sven P Heinrich; Christina Beisse; Antje Fuchs; Michael Bach
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2014-03-13       Impact factor: 2.379

6.  Similarities and differences between behavioral and electrophysiological visual acuity thresholds in healthy infants during the second half of the first year of life.

Authors:  Claudia Polevoy; Gina Muckle; Jean R Séguin; Emmanuel Ouellet; Dave Saint-Amour
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-02-20       Impact factor: 2.379

7.  Effects of sweep VEP parameters on visual acuity and contrast thresholds in children and adults.

Authors:  Fahad M Almoqbel; Naveen K Yadav; Susan J Leat; Liseann M Head; Elizabeth L Irving
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-08-06       Impact factor: 3.117

8.  Pattern visual evoked potential as a predictor of occlusion therapy for amblyopia.

Authors:  Woosuk Chung; Samin Hong; Jong Bok Lee; Sueng-Han Han
Journal:  Korean J Ophthalmol       Date:  2008-12

Review 9.  VEP estimation of visual acuity: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ruth Hamilton; Michael Bach; Sven P Heinrich; Michael B Hoffmann; J Vernon Odom; Daphne L McCulloch; Dorothy A Thompson
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2020-06-02       Impact factor: 2.379

Review 10.  Assessment of Human Visual Acuity Using Visual Evoked Potential: A Review.

Authors:  Xiaowei Zheng; Guanghua Xu; Kai Zhang; Renghao Liang; Wenqiang Yan; Peiyuan Tian; Yaguang Jia; Sicong Zhang; Chenghang Du
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-09-28       Impact factor: 3.576

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.