Linnea Andersson1, Johanna Sjölund, Josefin Nilsson. 1. Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, The Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Göteborg, Sweden.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous publications have suggested a high correlation between flash visual evoked potential (F-VEP) N2 peak latency and intracranial pressure. This would enable F-VEP to be used as a non-invasive and inexpensive method to estimate ICP in a number of settings. However, basic knowledge about variability across subjects and test-retest properties of the F-VEP is lacking. METHODS: Fifteen healthy adult subjects were tested on three different occasions. F-VEP responses were recorded using international standards. FINDINGS: For the tested population, mean N2 latency was 65.7 ms (SD 10.7 ms) and the range was 48-110 ms. Intra-individual variability was high, in four of the 15 subjects more than 15 ms between testing sessions. The same was found for P2 latency and for N2 and P2 amplitudes. The response waveform was very variable and unambiguous marking of peaks was often difficult. One out of the 15 subjects had a very poorly developed F-VEP response, but a normal pattern-reversal VEP response. CONCLUSIONS: F-VEP has a wide range of latency, amplitude and waveform across normal subjects. A large proportion of subjects also had a high intra-individual variability over time. This variability makes F-VEPs unreliable as a marker for intracranial pressure, and caution in interpreting F-VEP changes in clinical work is advised.
BACKGROUND: Previous publications have suggested a high correlation between flash visual evoked potential (F-VEP) N2 peak latency and intracranial pressure. This would enable F-VEP to be used as a non-invasive and inexpensive method to estimate ICP in a number of settings. However, basic knowledge about variability across subjects and test-retest properties of the F-VEP is lacking. METHODS: Fifteen healthy adult subjects were tested on three different occasions. F-VEP responses were recorded using international standards. FINDINGS: For the tested population, mean N2 latency was 65.7 ms (SD 10.7 ms) and the range was 48-110 ms. Intra-individual variability was high, in four of the 15 subjects more than 15 ms between testing sessions. The same was found for P2 latency and for N2 and P2 amplitudes. The response waveform was very variable and unambiguous marking of peaks was often difficult. One out of the 15 subjects had a very poorly developed F-VEP response, but a normal pattern-reversal VEP response. CONCLUSIONS: F-VEP has a wide range of latency, amplitude and waveform across normal subjects. A large proportion of subjects also had a high intra-individual variability over time. This variability makes F-VEPs unreliable as a marker for intracranial pressure, and caution in interpreting F-VEP changes in clinical work is advised.
Authors: Monica Manrique; Esperanza Mantilla-Rivas; Antonio R Porras Perez; Justin R Bryant; Md Sohel Rana; Liyun Tu; Robert F Keating; Albert K Oh; Marius G Linguraru; Gary F Rogers Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 5.169
Authors: M Manrique; E Mantilla-Rivas; M S Rana; H Crowder; N Oh; A K Oh; R F Keating; G F Rogers Journal: Childs Nerv Syst Date: 2022-06-18 Impact factor: 1.532
Authors: Esperanza Mantilla-Rivas; Liyun Tu; Agnes Goldrich; Monica Manrique; Antonio R Porras; Robert F Keating; Albert K Oh; Marius George Linguraru; Gary F Rogers Journal: J Craniofac Surg Date: 2020 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 1.046
Authors: Arnošt Mládek; Václav Gerla; Petr Šeba; Vladimír Kolář; Petr Skalický; Helen Whitley; Lenka Lhotská; Vladimír Beneš; Ondřej Bradáč Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-07-12 Impact factor: 4.379