Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The role of visual electrodiagnostics in management of children with neurofibromatosis type 1

  • Original Research Article
  • Published:
Documenta Ophthalmologica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the role of visual electrodiagnostic testing in children with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) despite improved accessibility to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Methods

The records from 39 children (78 eyes, 15 boys, 24 girls, average age at last visit of 11.5 ± 4.3 years, average follow-up time of 7.8 ± 3.9 years) with genetically confirmed NF1 were retrospectively analysed. They all underwent a thorough ophthalmological investigation, including age-appropriate visual acuity testing, anterior segment evaluation for Lisch nodules and a dilated fundus examination. If children were cooperative enough, colour vision was tested using the Hardy-Rand-Rittler test, visual fields were evaluated with Goldmann perimetry. All performed MRI of the brain and orbits as part of the standard of care protocol. Visual electrodiagnostics included electroretinography (ERG) and visual evoked potentials (VEP) using a standard protocol in older children, whereas with less cooperative children a modified protocol according to the Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH protocol) was used.

Results

The average visual acuity was 0.8 ± 0.3, colour vision was abnormal in 6%, perimetry in 8%, Lisch nodules were present in 62%, and the optic disc was pale in 66% of all eyes. Plexiform neurofibroma of the eyelid/orbit was present in 4%. Optic pathway glioma (OPG) was detected with MRI in 22 (57%) and in 6/22 treatment was indicated. Other intracranial NF1-related lesions were documented in 70% of children. VEP were abnormal in 16/39 of all children with NF1 (41%) comprising 14/22 (65%) of children with confirmed OPG and 2/17 (12%) of children without OPG. All full-field and pattern ERG responses were within normal limits. All individual VEP results are described and three cases from this cohort of children are presented in detail to illustrate the importance of VEP testing. In Case 1, VEP abnormality suggested subsequent MRI of the brain under general anaesthesia, which was otherwise contraindicated according to normal clinical findings and his young age. In Cases 2 and 3, VEP provided more precise functional information during the follow-up of OPG, while other psychophysical tests remained unchanged.

Conclusions

Electrodiagnostics has multifactorial role and importance in children with NF1, either when visual pathway function is impaired in young children, even before MRI under general anaesthesia and other psychophysical tests can be performed, as well as for a more precise monitoring of the visual pathway function before potential treatment of OPG, or after it, to evaluate its success.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Szudek J, Evans DG, Friedman JM (2003) Patterns of associations of clinical features in neurofibromatosis 1 (NF1). Hum Genet 112:289–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-002-0871-7. (Epub 2002 Dec 20)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Listernick R, Louis DN, Packer RJ, Gutmann DH (1997) Optic pathway gliomas in children with neurofibromatosis 1: consensus statement from the NF1 Optic Pathway Glioma Task Force. Ann Neurol 41:143–149. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.410410204

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Balcer LJ, Liu GT, Heller G, Bilaniuk L, Volpe NJ, Galetta SL, Molloy PT, Phillips PC, Janss AJ, Vaughn S, Maguire MG (2001) Visual loss in children with neurofibromatosis type 1 and optic pathway gliomas: relation to tumor location by magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Ophthalmol 131:442–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9394(00)00852-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Legius E, Messiaen L, Wolkenstein P, Pancza P, Avery RA, Berman Y, Blakeley J, Babovic-Vuksanovic D, Cunha KS, Ferner R, Fisher MJ, Friedman JM, Gutmann DH, Kehrer-Sawatzki H, Korf BR, Mautner VF, Peltonen S, Rauen KA, Riccardi V, Schorry E, Stemmer-Rachamimov A, Stevenson DA, Tadini G, Ullrich NJ, Viskochil D, Wimmer K, Yohay K, International Consensus Group on Neurofibromatosis Diagnostic Criteria (I-NF-DC), Huson SM, Evans DG, Plotkin SR (2021) Revised diagnostic criteria for neurofibromatosis type 1 and Legius syndrome: an international consensus recommendation. Genet Med 23:1506–1513. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-021-01170-5

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Grigg JRB, Jamieson RV (2016) Phakomatoses (including the neurofibromatoses). In: Lambert S, Lyons C (eds) Taylor and Hoyt’s pediatric ophthalmology and strabismus, 5th edn. Elsevier, pp 700–714

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gutmann DH, Ferner RE, Listernick RH, Korf BR, Wolters PL, Johnson KJ (2017) Neurofibromatosis type 1. Nat Rev Dis Prim 23(3):17004. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrdp.2017.4. (PMID: 28230061)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Sabol Z, Resić B, GjergjaJuraski R, Sabol F, KovacSizgorić M, Orsolić K, Ozretić D, Sepić-Grahovac D (2011) Clinical sensitivity and specificity of multiple T2-hyperintensities on brain magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis of neurofibromatosis type 1 in children: diagnostic accuracy study. Croat Med J 52:488–496. https://doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2011.52.488

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Hirbe AC, Gutmann DH (2014) Neurofibromatosis type 1: a multidisciplinary approach to care. Lancet Neurol 13:834–843. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70063-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Campen CJ, Gutmann DH (2018) Optic pathway gliomas in neurofibromatosis type 1. J Child Neurol 33:73–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/0883073817739509

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Paediatric imaging under general anaesthetic. Royal College of Anaesthetists guidance. November 2021. Available at: https://www.rcoa.ac.uk/sites/default/files/documents/2022 Accessed 17 July 2022

  11. Wolsey DH, Larson SA, Creel D, Hoffman R (2006) Can screening for optic nerve gliomas in patients with neurofibromatosis type I be performed with visual-evoked potential testing? J AAPOS 10:307–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaapos.2006.02.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Iannaccone A, McCluney RA, Brewer VR, Spiegel PH, Taylor JS, Kerr NC, Pivnick EK (2002) Visual evoked potentials in children with neurofibromatosis type 1. Doc Ophthalmol 105:63–81. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1015719803719

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Trisciuzzi MT, Riccardi R, Piccardi M, Iarossi G, Buzzonetti L, Dickmann A, Colosimo C Jr, Ruggiero A, Di Rocco C, Falsini B (2004) A fast visual evoked potential method for functional assessment and follow-up of childhood optic gliomas. Clin Neurophysiol 115:217–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1388-2457(03)00282-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Vagge A, Camicione P, Pellegrini M, Gatti G, Capris P, Severino M, Di Maita M, Panarello S, Traverso CE (2021) Role of visual evoked potentials and optical coherence tomography in the screening for optic pathway gliomas in patients with neurofibromatosis type I. Eur J Ophthalmol 31:698–703. https://doi.org/10.1177/1120672120906989

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bowman R, Walters B, Smith V, Prise KL, Handley SE, Green K, Mankad K, O’Hare P, Dahl C, Jorgensen M, Opocher E, Hargrave D, Thompson DA (2022) Visual outcomes and predictors in optic pathway glioma: a single centre study. Eye (Lond). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41433-022-02096-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bach M, Brigell MG, Hawlina M, Holder GE, Johnson MA, McCulloch DL, Meigen T, Viswanathan S (2013) ISCEV standard for clinical pattern electroretinography (PERG): 2012 update. Doc Ophthalmol 126:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-012-9353-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Odom JV, Bach M, Brigell M, Holder GE, McCulloch DL, Mizota A, Tormene AP, International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision (2016) ISCEV standard for clinical visual evoked potentials: (2016 update). Doc Ophthalmol 133:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-016-9553-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Marmoy OR, Moinuddin M, Thompson DA (2021) An alternative electroretinography protocol for children: a study of diagnostic agreement and accuracy relative to ISCEV standard electroretinograms. Acta Ophthalmol 100:322–330. https://doi.org/10.1111/aos.14938

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Thompson DA, Liasis A (2016) Visual electrophysiology: how it can help you and your patient. In: Lambert S, Lyons C (eds) Taylor and Hoyt’s pediatric ophthalmology and strabismus, 5th edn. Elsevier, pp 68–75

    Google Scholar 

  20. Listernick R, Charrow J, Greenwald M, Mets M (1994) Natural history of optic pathway tumors in children with neurofibromatosis type 1: a longitudinal study. J Pediatr 125:63–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-3476(94)70122-9

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Thiagalingam S, Flaherty M, Billson F, North K (2004) Neurofibromatosis type 1 and optic pathway gliomas: follow-up of 54 patients. Ophthalmology 111:568–577

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Listernick R, Ferner RE, Liu GT, Gutmann DH (2007) Optic pathway gliomas in neurofibromatosis 1: controversies and recommendations. Ann Neurol 61:189–198. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.21107

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ribeiro MJ, Violante IR, Bernardino I, Ramos F, Saraiva J, Reviriego P, Upadhyaya M, Silva ED, Castelo-Branco M (2012) Abnormal achromatic and chromatic contrast sensitivity in neurofibromatosis type 1. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 53:287–293. https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.11-8225

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ragge NK, Falk RE, Cohen WE, Murphree AL (1993) Images of Lisch nodules across the spectrum. Eye (Lond) 7:95–101. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.1993.20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kinori M, Armarnik S, Listernick R, Charrow J, Zeid JL (2021) Neurofibromatosis type 1-associated optic pathway glioma in children: a follow-up of 10 years or more. Am J Ophthalmol 221:91–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajo.2020.03.053

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. North K, Cochineas C, Tang E, Fagan E (1994) Optic gliomas in neurofibromatosis type 1: role of visual evoked potentials. Pediatr Neurol 10(2):117–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/0887-8994(94)90043-4. (PMID: 8024659)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hegedus B, Hughes FW, Garbow JR, Gianino S, Banerjee D, Kim K, Ellisman MH, Brantley MA Jr, Gutmann DH (2009) Optic nerve dysfunction in a mouse model of neurofibromatosis-1 optic glioma. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 68:542–551. https://doi.org/10.1097/NEN.0b013e3181a3240b

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. de Blank PMK, Fisher MJ, Liu GT, Gutmann DH, Listernick R, Ferner RE, Avery RA (2017) Optic pathway gliomas in neurofibromatosis type 1: an update: surveillance, treatment indications, and biomarkers of vision. J Neuroophthalmol 37(Suppl 1):S23–S32. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNO.0000000000000550

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. King A, Listernick R, Charrow J, Piersall L, Gutmann DH (2003) Optic pathway gliomas in neurofibromatosis type 1: the effect of presenting symptoms on outcome. Am J Med Genet A 122A:95–99. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.a.20211

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Nika Vrabič, MD, for helping to prepare Figures for publication.

Funding

No funding was received for this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University Eye Clinic Ljubljana, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Grablovičeva 46, 1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia

    Manca Tekavčič Pompe & Maja Šuštar Habjan

  2. Faculty of Medicine, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia

    Manca Tekavčič Pompe

  3. Clinical Institute of Radiology, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia

    Nuška Pečarič Meglič

Authors
  1. Manca Tekavčič Pompe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nuška Pečarič Meglič
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maja Šuštar Habjan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Manca Tekavčič Pompe.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers' bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Republic of Slovenia National Medical Ethics Committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

For this type of study (retrospective review), formal consent is not required; however, informed content was obtained from all individual participants for whom identifying information is included in this article.

Statement of human rights

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the treatment of human participants were followed.

Statement on the welfare of animals

No animals were used in this research.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tekavčič Pompe, M., Pečarič Meglič, N. & Šuštar Habjan, M. The role of visual electrodiagnostics in management of children with neurofibromatosis type 1. Doc Ophthalmol 146, 121–136 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-023-09920-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-023-09920-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation