Skip to main content
Log in

Subclinical visual field defects in multiple sclerosis

Demonstration and quantification with automated perimetry, and comparison with visually evoked potentials

  • Original Investigations
  • Published:
Journal of Neurology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Fourteen patients with definite but inactive multiple sclerosis (MS) and 17 normal controls were examined with the automated perimeter octopus. Most of the patients had subclinical visual field defects, typically consisting of patchy, shallow scotomata located mostly in an area of between 15° and 30° eccentricity. In 8 patients, more than 15% of the tested visual field of at least one eye was abnormal. The severity and extent of the defects was unrelated to a history of optic neuritis. When visually evoked potentials (VEPs) of these subjects were examined using a reversing pattern, no correlation was found in the MS patients between prolonged VEP latencies and the location, depth or extent of visual field defects. Since subclinical visual field defects may be found in MS patients with normal VEP latencies, automated perimetry can be helpful in diagnosing some cases.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Asselman P, Chadwick DW, Marsden CD (1975) Visual evoked responses in the diagnosis and management of patients suspected of multiple sclerosis. Brain 98:261–282

    Google Scholar 

  2. Automatic perimeter octopus: Operation instructions and description. Issue 4. Interzeag, Schlieren (Switzerland), 1979

  3. Bébié H, Fankhauser F, Jenni A, Haeberlin H The new software package. Proceedings of the First International Meeting on the Automatic Perimeter Octopus, April 1979, Interzeag, Schlieren (Switzerland), pp 155–178

  4. Burde RM, Pamela F, Gallin BA (1975) Visual parameters associated with recovered retrobulbar optic neuritis. Am J Ophthalmol 79:1034–1037

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ellenberger C (1974) Modern perimetry in neuro-ophthalmic diagnosis. Arch Neurol 30:193–201

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ellenberger C, Ziegler SB (1977) Visual evoked potentials and quantitative perimetry in multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 1:561–564

    Google Scholar 

  7. Fankhauser F (1979) Problems related to the design of automatic perimeters. Doc Ophthalmol 47:89–138

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fankhauser F, Bébié H (1979) Threshold fluctuations, interpolations and spatial resolution in perimetry. Doc Ophthalmol 19:295–309

    Google Scholar 

  9. Feinsod M, Hoyt WF (1975) Subclinical optic neuropathy in multiple sclerosis. How early VER components reflect axon loss and conduction defects in optic pathways. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 38:1109–1114

    Google Scholar 

  10. Flammer J, Nagel G, Glowazki A, Moser HR, Fankhauser F (1981) Detection and definition of scotomata of the central visual field by computer methods. Doc Ophthalmol 26:33–41

    Google Scholar 

  11. Frisén L, Hoyt WF (1974) Insidious atrophy of retinal nerve fibers in multiple sclerosis. Fundoscopic identification on patients with and without visual complaints. Arch Ophthalmol 92:91–97

    Google Scholar 

  12. Halliday AM, McDonald WI, Mushin J (1973) Visual evoked response in diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Br Med J 4:661–664

    Google Scholar 

  13. Halliday AM, McDonald WI (1977) Pathophysiology of demyelinating disease. Br Med Bull 33:21–27

    Google Scholar 

  14. Harter R (1970) Evoked cortical responses to checkerboard patterns: Effect of check-size as a function of retinal eccentricity. Vision Res 10:1365–1376

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hennerici M, Wenzel D, Freund H-J (1977) The comparison of small-size rectangle and checkerboard stimulation for the evaluation of delayed visual evoked responses in patients suspected of multiple sclerosis. Brain 100:119–136

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lehmann D, Mir Z (1976) Methodik und Auswertung visuell evozierter EEG-Potentiale bei Verdacht auf Multiple Sklerose. J Neurol 213:97–103

    Google Scholar 

  17. Lowitzsch K, Kuhnt U, Sakmann C, Maurer K, Hopf HC, Schott D, Thäter K (1976) Visual pattern evoked responses and blink reflexes in assessment of MS diagnosis. J Neurol 213:17–32

    Google Scholar 

  18. Matthews WR, Small DG (1979) Serial recording of visual and somatosensory evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci 40:11–21

    Google Scholar 

  19. Matthews WB, Small DG, Small M, Pountney E (1977) Pattern reversal evoked visual potential in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 40:1009–1014

    Google Scholar 

  20. McAlpine D, Lumsden CE, Acheson ED (1972) Multiple sclerosis—A reappraisal. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  21. Meienberg O, Kutak L, Smolenski C, Ludin HP (1979) Pattern reversal evoked cortical responses in normals. A study of different methods of stimulation and potential reproducibility. J Neurol 222:81–93

    Google Scholar 

  22. Patterson VH, Heron JR (1980) Visual field abnormalities in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 43:205–209

    Google Scholar 

  23. Regan D, Milner BA, Heron JR (1976) Delayed visual perception and delayed visual evoked potentials in the spinal form of multiple sclerosis and in retrobulbar neuritis. Brain 99:43–66

    Google Scholar 

  24. Shahrokhi F, Chiappa KH, Young RR (1978) Pattern shift visual evoked responses. Two-hundred patients with optic neuritis and/or multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 35:65–71

    Google Scholar 

  25. Sokol S (1976) Visually evoked potentials: Theory, techniques and clinical applications. Surv Ophthalmol 21:18–44

    Google Scholar 

  26. Visual Field Atlas. Octopus system (1979) 2nd edn. Interzeag, Schlieren (Switzerland)

  27. Wutz W, Bartl G, Hiti H, Rodler H (1980) Verlaufsbeobachtungen der Neuritis retrobulbaris — Vergleichende psychophysische und elektroophthalmologische Befunde. Klin Monatsbl Augenheilkd 177:689–695

    Google Scholar 

  28. Zeese JA (1977) Pattern visual evoked responses in multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 34:314–316

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Supported in part by Geigy Jubilaeumsstiftung, Basel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Meienberg, O., Flammer, J. & Ludin, HP. Subclinical visual field defects in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol 227, 125–133 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00313566

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00313566

Key words

Navigation