Literature DB >> 22476612

Clinical use of multifocal visual-evoked potentials in a glaucoma practice: a prospective study.

Carlos Gustavo De Moraes1, Jeffrey M Liebmann, Robert Ritch, Donald C Hood.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To test a framework that describes how the multifocal visual-evoked potential (mfVEP) technique is used in a particular glaucoma practice.
METHODS: In this prospective, descriptive study, glaucoma suspects, ocular hypertensives and glaucoma patients were referred for mfVEP testing by a single glaucoma specialist over a 2-year period. All patients underwent standard automated perimetry (SAP) and mfVEP testing within 3 months. Two hundred and ten patients (420 eyes) were referred for mfVEP testing for the following reasons: (1) normal SAP tests suspected of early functional loss (ocular hypertensives, n = 43; and glaucoma suspects on the basis of suspicious optic disks, n = 52); (2) normal-tension glaucoma patients with suspected central SAP defects (n = 33); and (3) SAP abnormalities needing confirmation (n = 82).
RESULTS: All the glaucoma suspects with normal SAP and mfVEP results remained untreated. Of those with abnormal mfVEP results, 68 % (15/22) were treated because the abnormal regions on the mfVEP were consistent with the abnormal regions seen during clinical examination of the optic disk. The mfVEP was abnormal in 86 % (69/80) of eyes with glaucomatous optic neuropathy and SAP damage, even though it did not result in an altered treatment regimen. In NTG patients, the mfVEP showed central defects in 44 % (12 of 27) of the eyes with apparently normal central fields and confirmed central scotomata in 92 % (36 of 39), leading to more rigorous surveillance of these patients.
CONCLUSIONS: In a clinical practice, the mfVEP was used when clinical examination and subjective visual fields provided insufficient or conflicting information. This information influenced clinical management.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22476612      PMCID: PMC3498911          DOI: 10.1007/s10633-012-9324-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0012-4486            Impact factor:   2.379


  23 in total

1.  An interocular comparison of the multifocal VEP: a possible technique for detecting local damage to the optic nerve.

Authors:  D C Hood; X Zhang; V C Greenstein; S Kangovi; J G Odel; J M Liebmann; R Ritch
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.799

Review 2.  Multifocal VEP and ganglion cell damage: applications and limitations for the study of glaucoma.

Authors:  Donald C Hood; Vivienne C Greenstein
Journal:  Prog Retin Eye Res       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 21.198

3.  Detecting early to mild glaucomatous damage: a comparison of the multifocal VEP and automated perimetry.

Authors:  Donald C Hood; Phamornsak Thienprasiddhi; Vivienne C Greenstein; Bryan J Winn; Nitin Ohri; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Robert Ritch
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 4.799

4.  Multifocal visual evoked potential responses in glaucoma patients with unilateral hemifield defects.

Authors:  Phamornsak Thienprasiddhi; Vivienne C Greenstein; Candice S Chen; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Robert Ritch; Donald C Hood
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 5.258

5.  The relationship between standard automated perimetry and GDx VCC measurements.

Authors:  Nicolaas J Reus; Hans G Lemij
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 4.799

6.  Multifocal objective perimetry in the detection of glaucomatous field loss.

Authors:  Ivan Goldberg; Stuart L Graham; Alexander I Klistorner
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 5.258

7.  Comparison of visual field defects in normal-tension glaucoma and high-tension glaucoma.

Authors:  J Caprioli; M Sears; G L Spaeth
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  1986-09-15       Impact factor: 5.258

8.  Normal versus high tension glaucoma: a comparison of functional and structural defects.

Authors:  Oraorn Thonginnetra; Vivienne C Greenstein; David Chu; Jeffrey M Liebmann; Robert Ritch; Donald C Hood
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 2.503

9.  Identifying early glaucoma with optical coherence tomography.

Authors:  Kouros Nouri-Mahdavi; Douglas Hoffman; Dana P Tannenbaum; Simon K Law; Joseph Caprioli
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 5.258

10.  Detecting glaucomatous damage with multifocal visual evoked potentials: how can a monocular test work?

Authors:  Donald C Hood; Xian Zhang; Bryan J Winn
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.503

View more
  3 in total

1.  Structural and functional changes in glaucoma: comparing the two-flash multifocal electroretinogram to optical coherence tomography and visual fields.

Authors:  Anna A Ledolter; Matthias Monhart; Andreas Schoetzau; Margarita G Todorova; Anja M Palmowski-Wolfe
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-01-24       Impact factor: 2.379

2.  Comparing three different modes of electroretinography in experimental glaucoma: diagnostic performance and correlation to structure.

Authors:  Laura Wilsey; Sowjanya Gowrisankaran; Grant Cull; Christy Hardin; Claude F Burgoyne; Brad Fortune
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-02-27       Impact factor: 2.379

3.  Structural and Functional Evaluations for the Early Detection of Glaucoma.

Authors:  Katie A Lucy; Gadi Wollstein
Journal:  Expert Rev Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-09-14
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.