| Literature DB >> 31569741 |
Mostafa M Haredy1,2, Alki Liasis3, Amani Davis4, Kathleen Koesarie5, Valeria Fu6, Joseph E Losee7, Jesse A Goldstein8, Ken K Nischal9.
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the effect of craniofacial surgical intervention on the visual pathway's function by comparing pre- to post-operative patterned, visually-evoked potentials (pVEP). A retrospective review was conducted on craniosynostosis patients who had pre- and post-craniofacial surgery pVEP testing. The pVEP measured grade in terms of amplitude latency and morphology of the waveforms. The pre- and post-operative results were compared. The study identified 63 patients (mean age at preoperative pVEP of 16.9 months). Preoperatively, 33 patients (52.4%) had abnormal pVEP. Nine patients had evidence of intracranial hypertension, and of those, eight (88.9%) had abnormal pVEP. Within 6 months postoperatively, 24 of 33 patients (72.7%) with abnormal preoperative pVEP developed normal postoperative pVEP, while all 30 patients with normal preoperative VEP maintained their normal results postoperatively. Significant improvements in pVEP latency in patients with broad or delayed latency waveforms was evident for subjects with preoperative grades 2-4 (grade 2, p = 0.015; grade 3, p = 0.029; grade 4; p = 0.007), while significant postoperative increase in amplitude was significant for patients with abnormally low amplitude grade 3 and 5 waveforms (grade 3, p = 0.011; grade 5, p = 0.029). Serial pVEP testing represents a useful tool for the early detection of visual pathway dysfunction and follow up visual pathway function in craniosynostosis. Surgical intervention for craniosynostosis can result in the reversal of preoperative pVEP abnormalities seen in these patients, resulting in the normalization of the pVEP waveform, amplitude and latency, depending on the preoperative pVEP abnormality.Entities:
Keywords: craniosynostosis; visual function; visually-evoked potentials
Year: 2019 PMID: 31569741 PMCID: PMC6832611 DOI: 10.3390/jcm8101555
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Med ISSN: 2077-0383 Impact factor: 4.241
The grading of patterned, visually-evoked potentials (pVEP) according to the Thompson and Nischal classification [11].
| Grade | Criteria | Number of Patients (%) | Mean Age at Preoperative VEP in Months (Range) * | Check Size Used |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 1 | Normal VEP test | 30 (47.6) | 17 (4.4–82.1) | 12.5′ (18 cases) |
| Grade 2 | Normal amplitude and latency, but broad waveform | 10 (15.9) | 16.3 (2.8–75.5) | 12.5′ (7 cases) |
| Grade 3 | Reduced amplitude, broad waveform with normal latency | 9 (14.3) | 20.1 (2–121) | 12.5′ (5 cases) |
| Grade 4 | Normal amplitude, prolonged latency | 10 (15.9) | 16.1 (2–66.1) | 12.5′ (4 cases) |
| Grade 5 | Reduced amplitude, prolonged latency | 4 (6.3) | 19.8 (4.3–60.3) | 12.5′ (2 cases) |
* No significant relationship between age and preoperative pVEP grade, p = 0.51; Kruskal–Wallis test; VEP, visual evoked potentials.
Figure 1Postoperative changes in pVEP grades within 6 months for the whole cohort. Subsequent pVEP testing was performed within 1 year later for patients with grades 4 and 5 who had a persistent pVEP abnormality; pVEP, patterned, visually-evoked potentials.
Pre- to post-operative changes in pVEP amplitude for the total cohort and different grades, within 6 months after surgery. Increased amplitude indicates improvement.
| Grade | Total Cohort | Grade 1 | Grade 2 | Grade 3 | Grade 4 | Grade 5 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre | Post | Pre | Post | Pre | Post | Pre | Post | Pre | Post | Pre | Post | |
| Mean Amplitude (µv) | 13.3 | 16.6 | 15.7 | 17.4 | 16.0 | 21.7 | 4.2 | 14.0 | 15.5 | 14.4 | 4.2 | 10.2 |
| SD | ±8.0 | ±10.0 | ±6.9 | ±11.1 | ±8.8 | ±9.7 | ±0.8 | ±10.4 | ±8.3 | ±6.6 | ±0.5 | ±4.0 |
|
| 0.24 | 0.11 |
| 0.37 |
| |||||||
* Paired t-test; Standard deviation (SD).
Pre- to post-operative changes in pVEP latency for total cohort and different grades within 6 months after surgery. Decreased latency indicates improvement.
| Grade | Total Cohort | Grade 1 | Grade 2 | Grade 3 | Grade 4 | Grade 5 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pre | Post | Pre | Post | Pre | Post | Pre | Post | Pre | Post | Pre | Post | |
| Mean | 123.2 | 114.2 | 113.9 | 112.1 | 124.5 | 113.8 | 123.5 | 110.6 | 143.0 | 119.3 | 139.6 | 126.0 |
| SD | ±17.7 | ±11.1 | ±11.5 | ±9.7 | ±11.9 | ±9.5 | ±17.4 | ±11.4 | ±21.6 | ±13.6 | ±12.0 | ±12.5 |
| <0.001 | 0.18 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.007 | 0.07 | |||||||
* Paired t-test.
Figure 2(a) Sample VEP waveforms grade 1–5, (b–d) are sample waveforms from individual subjects at baseline and follow-up: (b) grade 5 to 1, (c) grade 4 to 1, (d) grade 3 to 1, and (e) grade 2 to 1. Grey waves are individual trials and black waveforms are the grand average of the two reproducible trials.
Figure 3Postoperative changes in the means of pVEP amplitude (a) and latency (b), in each preoperative pVEP grade within 6 months after surgery, with the standard error of mean bars shown; (a) *, Significant postoperative increase in pVEP amplitude; p < 0.05; (b) *, Significant postoperative decrease in pVEP latency; p < 0.05.