Oliver R Marmoy1,2, Sian E Handley3,4, Dorothy A Thompson3,4. 1. Tony Kriss Visual Electrophysiology Unit, Clinical and Academic, Department of Ophthalmology, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children, London, WC1N 3JH, UK. O.Marmoy@nhs.net. 2. Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK. O.Marmoy@nhs.net. 3. Tony Kriss Visual Electrophysiology Unit, Clinical and Academic, Department of Ophthalmology, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children, London, WC1N 3JH, UK. 4. UCL-GOSH Institute for Child Health, UCL, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Visual evoked potentials (VEPs) assess the function of the visual pathway from the retina to the primary visual cortex. There is much evidence that monocular pattern-reversal and flash VEPs can distinguish dysfunction due to chiasmal and post-chiasmal afferent pathway lesions. There is less evidence about the use of pattern-onset/OFFset VEPs to identify post-chiasmic dysfunction. METHODS: We present nine patients with a range of visual pathway defects that caused dense hemianopic field defects. These patients had pattern onset-OFFset VEPs recorded from an array of occipital electrodes referred to a mid-frontal electrode to checks that appeared for 230 ms and disappeared for 300 ms into a background of mean luminance, in a stimulus field of 30°. RESULTS: We found pattern-onset VEP components lateralise to occipital electrodes overlaying the functional hemisphere, whereas pattern-OFFset VEP components demonstrate the paradoxical lateralisation phenomenon, described in reversal VEPs, and are maximal over the contralateral occiput. CONCLUSION: Our findings show how extending the recording time window to include an OFFset VEP facilitates identification of hemianopic visual field defects. We advocate the pattern-onset/OFFset VEP in the assessment of patients with hemianopia, having particular value for patients who are otherwise unable to perform more demanding half-field electrophysiology, imaging or psychophysical testing.
BACKGROUND: Visual evoked potentials (VEPs) assess the function of the visual pathway from the retina to the primary visual cortex. There is much evidence that monocular pattern-reversal and flash VEPs can distinguish dysfunction due to chiasmal and post-chiasmal afferent pathway lesions. There is less evidence about the use of pattern-onset/OFFset VEPs to identify post-chiasmic dysfunction. METHODS: We present nine patients with a range of visual pathway defects that caused dense hemianopic field defects. These patients had pattern onset-OFFset VEPs recorded from an array of occipital electrodes referred to a mid-frontal electrode to checks that appeared for 230 ms and disappeared for 300 ms into a background of mean luminance, in a stimulus field of 30°. RESULTS: We found pattern-onset VEP components lateralise to occipital electrodes overlaying the functional hemisphere, whereas pattern-OFFset VEP components demonstrate the paradoxical lateralisation phenomenon, described in reversal VEPs, and are maximal over the contralateral occiput. CONCLUSION: Our findings show how extending the recording time window to include an OFFset VEP facilitates identification of hemianopic visual field defects. We advocate the pattern-onset/OFFset VEP in the assessment of patients with hemianopia, having particular value for patients who are otherwise unable to perform more demanding half-field electrophysiology, imaging or psychophysical testing.