Literature DB >> 27443562

ISCEV standard for clinical visual evoked potentials: (2016 update).

J Vernon Odom1, Michael Bach2, Mitchell Brigell3, Graham E Holder4, Daphne L McCulloch5, Atsushi Mizota6, Alma Patrizia Tormene7.   

Abstract

Visual evoked potentials (VEPs) can provide important diagnostic information regarding the functional integrity of the visual system. This document updates the ISCEV standard for clinical VEP testing and supersedes the 2009 standard. The main changes in this revision are the acknowledgment that pattern stimuli can be produced using a variety of technologies with an emphasis on the need for manufacturers to ensure that there is no luminance change during pattern reversal or pattern onset/offset. The document is also edited to bring the VEP standard into closer harmony with other ISCEV standards. The ISCEV standard VEP is based on a subset of stimulus and recording conditions that provide core clinical information and can be performed by most clinical electrophysiology laboratories throughout the world. These are: (1) Pattern-reversal VEPs elicited by checkerboard stimuli with large 1 degree (°) and small 0.25° checks. (2) Pattern onset/offset VEPs elicited by checkerboard stimuli with large 1° and small 0.25° checks. (3) Flash VEPs elicited by a flash (brief luminance increment) which subtends a visual field of at least 20°. The ISCEV standard VEP protocols are defined for a single recording channel with a midline occipital active electrode. These protocols are intended for assessment of the eye and/or optic nerves anterior to the optic chiasm. Extended, multi-channel protocols are required to evaluate postchiasmal lesions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Flash visual evoked potential; Pattern onset/offset; Pattern-reversal visual evoked potential; Standard; Visual evoked potential

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27443562     DOI: 10.1007/s10633-016-9553-y

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


  6 in total

1.  Guidelines for calibration of stimulus and recording parameters used in clinical electrophysiology of vision.

Authors:  Mitchell Brigell; Michael Bach; Colin Barber; Anne Moskowitz; John Robson
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 2.379

2.  Guideline 5: Guidelines for standard electrode position nomenclature.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 2.177

3.  ISCEV standard for clinical visual evoked potentials (2009 update).

Authors:  J Vernon Odom; Michael Bach; Mitchell Brigell; Graham E Holder; Daphne L McCulloch; Alma Patrizia Tormene
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2009-10-14       Impact factor: 2.379

4.  ISCEV standard for clinical electro-oculography (2010 update).

Authors:  Michael F Marmor; Mitchell G Brigell; Daphne L McCulloch; Carol A Westall; Michael Bach
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-02-05       Impact factor: 2.379

Review 5.  ISCEV standard for clinical pattern electroretinography (PERG): 2012 update.

Authors:  Michael Bach; Mitchell G Brigell; Marko Hawlina; Graham E Holder; Mary A Johnson; Daphne L McCulloch; Thomas Meigen; Suresh Viswanathan
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2012-10-17       Impact factor: 2.379

Review 6.  ISCEV standard for clinical multifocal electroretinography (mfERG) (2011 edition).

Authors:  Donald C Hood; Michael Bach; Mitchell Brigell; David Keating; Mineo Kondo; Jonathan S Lyons; Michael F Marmor; Daphne L McCulloch; Anja M Palmowski-Wolfe
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2011-10-30       Impact factor: 2.379

  6 in total
  150 in total

1.  The CAPOS mutation in ATP1A3 alters Na/K-ATPase function and results in auditory neuropathy which has implications for management.

Authors:  Lisbeth Tranebjærg; Nicola Strenzke; Sture Lindholm; Nanna D Rendtorff; Hanne Poulsen; Himanshu Khandelia; Wojciech Kopec; Troels J Brünnich Lyngbye; Christian Hamel; Cecile Delettre; Beatrice Bocquet; Michael Bille; Hanne H Owen; Toke Bek; Hanne Jensen; Karen Østergaard; Claes Möller; Linda Luxon; Lucinda Carr; Louise Wilson; Kaukab Rajput; Tony Sirimanna; Katherine Harrop-Griffiths; Shamima Rahman; Barbara Vona; Julia Doll; Thomas Haaf; Oliver Bartsch; Hendrik Rosewich; Tobias Moser; Maria Bitner-Glindzicz
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 4.132

2.  Can VEP-based acuity estimates in one eye be improved by applying knowledge from the other eye?

Authors:  Jessica Knötzele; Sven P Heinrich
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-06-03       Impact factor: 2.379

3.  VEP analysis methods in children with optic nerve hypoplasia: relationship to visual acuity and optic disc diameter.

Authors:  John P Kelly; James O Phillips; Avery H Weiss
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2016-11-23       Impact factor: 2.379

4.  Objective assessment of visual acuity: a refined model for analyzing the sweep VEP.

Authors:  Torsten Strasser; Fadi Nasser; Hana Langrová; Ditta Zobor; Łukasz Lisowski; Dominic Hillerkuss; Carla Sailer; Anne Kurtenbach; Eberhart Zrenner
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 2.379

5.  VEP and PERG in patients with multiple sclerosis, with and without a history of optic neuritis.

Authors:  M Janáky; Á Jánossy; G Horváth; G Benedek; G Braunitzer
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 2.379

6.  Gender-based normative values for pattern-reversal and flash visually evoked potentials under binocular and monocular stimulation in healthy adults.

Authors:  Patrícia de Freitas Dotto; Adriana Berezovsky; Paula Yuri Sacai; Daniel Martins Rocha; Solange Rios Salomão
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-05-30       Impact factor: 2.379

7.  Harmonization of Outcomes and Vision Endpoints in Vision Restoration Trials: Recommendations from the International HOVER Taskforce.

Authors:  Lauren N Ayton; Joseph F Rizzo; Ian L Bailey; August Colenbrander; Gislin Dagnelie; Duane R Geruschat; Philip C Hessburg; Chris D McCarthy; Matthew A Petoe; Gary S Rubin; Philip R Troyk
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2020-07-16       Impact factor: 3.283

8.  Toxicity and in vivo release profile of sirolimus from implants into the vitreous of rabbits' eyes.

Authors:  Mayara Rodrigues Brandão De Paiva; Nayara Almeida Lage; Maria Carolina Andrade Guerra; Marcos Paulo Gomes Mol; Marcela Coelho Silva Ribeiro; Gustavo De Oliveira Fulgêncio; Dawidson A Gomes; Isabela Da Costa César; Sílvia Ligório Fialho; Armando Silva-Cunha
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-11-19       Impact factor: 2.379

9.  Bilateral vision loss due to Leber's hereditary optic neuropathy after long-term alcohol, nicotine and drug abuse.

Authors:  Johanna Maass; Egbert Matthé
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2018-01-25       Impact factor: 2.379

Review 10.  Visual function tests including the role of optical coherence tomography in neurofibromatosis 1.

Authors:  Daphna Mezad-Koursh; Anat Bachar Zipori; Dinah Zur; Lior Degabli; Meital Ben-Dov; Ainat Klein
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2020-08-04       Impact factor: 1.475

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.