BACKGROUND: Contrast acuity (identification of low-contrast letters on a white background) is frequently reduced in patients with demyelinating optic neuropathy associated with multiple sclerosis (MS), even when high-contrast (Snellen) visual acuity is normal. Since visual evoked potentials (VEPs) induced with high-contrast pattern-reversal stimuli are typically increased in latency in demyelinating optic neuropathy, we asked if VEPs induced with low-contrast stimuli would be more prolonged and thus helpful in identifying demyelinating optic neuropathy in MS. METHODS: We studied 15 patients with clinically definite MS and 15 age-matched normal controls. All subjects underwent a neuro-ophthalmologic assessment, including measurement of high-contrast visual acuity and low-contrast acuities with 25%, 10%, 5%, 2.5%, and 1.25% contrast Sloan charts. In patients with MS, peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness was determined using optical coherence tomography. Monocular VEPs were induced using pattern-reversal checkerboard stimuli with 100% and 10% contrast between checks, at 5 spatial frequencies (8-130 minutes of arc). RESULTS: VEP latencies were significantly increased in response to low- compared with high-contrast stimuli in both groups. VEP latencies were significantly greater in patients with MS than controls for both high- and low-contrast stimuli. VEP latencies correlated with high- and low-contrast visual acuities and RNFL thickness. VEPs were less likely to be induced with low- than with high-contrast stimuli in eyes with severe residual visual loss. CONCLUSIONS: Visual evoked potentials obtained in patients with multiple sclerosis using low-contrast stimuli are increased in latency or absent when compared with those obtained using high-contrast stimuli and, thus, may prove to be helpful in identifying demyelinating optic neuropathy.
BACKGROUND: Contrast acuity (identification of low-contrast letters on a white background) is frequently reduced in patients with demyelinating optic neuropathy associated with multiple sclerosis (MS), even when high-contrast (Snellen) visual acuity is normal. Since visual evoked potentials (VEPs) induced with high-contrast pattern-reversal stimuli are typically increased in latency in demyelinating optic neuropathy, we asked if VEPs induced with low-contrast stimuli would be more prolonged and thus helpful in identifying demyelinating optic neuropathy in MS. METHODS: We studied 15 patients with clinically definite MS and 15 age-matched normal controls. All subjects underwent a neuro-ophthalmologic assessment, including measurement of high-contrast visual acuity and low-contrast acuities with 25%, 10%, 5%, 2.5%, and 1.25% contrast Sloan charts. In patients with MS, peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness was determined using optical coherence tomography. Monocular VEPs were induced using pattern-reversal checkerboard stimuli with 100% and 10% contrast between checks, at 5 spatial frequencies (8-130 minutes of arc). RESULTS: VEP latencies were significantly increased in response to low- compared with high-contrast stimuli in both groups. VEP latencies were significantly greater in patients with MS than controls for both high- and low-contrast stimuli. VEP latencies correlated with high- and low-contrast visual acuities and RNFL thickness. VEPs were less likely to be induced with low- than with high-contrast stimuli in eyes with severe residual visual loss. CONCLUSIONS: Visual evoked potentials obtained in patients with multiple sclerosis using low-contrast stimuli are increased in latency or absent when compared with those obtained using high-contrast stimuli and, thus, may prove to be helpful in identifying demyelinating optic neuropathy.
Authors: M L Baier; G R Cutter; R A Rudick; D Miller; J A Cohen; B Weinstock-Guttman; M Mass; L J Balcer Journal: Neurology Date: 2005-03-22 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Audrey R Frohman; Zane Schnurman; Amy Conger; Darrel Conger; Shin Beh; Benjamin Greenberg; Erich Sutter; Peter A Calabresi; Laura J Balcer; Teresa C Frohman; Elliot M Frohman Journal: Neurology Date: 2012-07-18 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Reiko E Sakai; Daniel J Feller; Kristin M Galetta; Steven L Galetta; Laura J Balcer Journal: J Neuroophthalmol Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 3.042
Authors: Martin Hardmeier; Florian Hatz; Yvonne Naegelin; Darren Hight; Christian Schindler; Ludwig Kappos; Margitta Seeck; Christoph M Michel; Peter Fuhr Journal: Brain Topogr Date: 2013-10-02 Impact factor: 3.020