Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Binocular summation in visual evoked cortical potential in patients who have significantly different P100 peak latencies in their two eyes

  • Clinical Investigation
  • Published:
Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To determine whether binocular summation in visual evoked cortical potential (VEP) is present in patients who have significantly different P100 peak latencies in their two eyes.

Methods

Twelve patients with unilateral optic neuritis (ON) and 11 normal controls were studied. All of them had visual acuity of ≥20/20 in both two eyes and good stereoacuity. Transient and steady-state VEPs were recorded with monocular and binocular pattern-reversal stimulation.

Results

In normal controls, the binocular summation ratio was 1.05 with transient stimulation and 1.21 with steady-state stimulation, and in ON patients it was 1.19 and 1.30, respectively. In ON patients, the peak latency of P100 components was delayed significantly when the affected eye was stimulated, but with binocular stimulation the waveform was very similar to that when the fellow eye was stimulated.

Conclusion

Binocular summation of VECP is not present in ON cases with large differences in the peak latency between the two eyes even if they have good stereoacuity. Binocular summation may not be correlated with stereopsis in adults whose binocular function has already matured.

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
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Adachi-Usami E, Lehmann D (1982) Scalp field topography of monocular and binocular evoked potentials—upper and lower hemiretinal stimuli. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser 31:391–398

    Google Scholar 

  2. Adachi-Usami E, Lehmann D (1983) Monocular and binocular evoked average potential field topography: upper and lower hemiretinal stimuli. Exp Brain Res 50:341–346

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Amigo G, Fiorentini A, Pirchio M, Spinelli D (1978) Binocular vision tested with visually evoked potentials in children and infants. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 17:910–915

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Apkarian PA, Nakayama K, Tyler CW (1981) Binocularity in the human visual evoked potentials: facilitation, summation and suppression. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol 51:32–48

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Giuseppe N, Andrea F(1983) Binocular interaction in visual-evoked response: summation, facilitation and inhibition in clinical study of binocular vision. Ophthalmic Res 15:261–264

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hely MA, McManis PG, Walsh JC, McLeod JG (1986) Visual evoked responses and ophthalmological examination in optic neuritis: A follow-up study. J Neurol Sci 75:275–283

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hubel DH, Wiesel TN (1978) Functional architecture of macaque monkey visual cortex. Proc R Soc Lond Ser B 198:1-59

    Google Scholar 

  8. Johansson B, Jakobsson P (1993) VEP latency – A comparison between normal and defective binocularity. Clin Vision Sci 3:245–251

    Google Scholar 

  9. Johansson B, Jakobsson P (2000) Fourier analysis of steady-state visual evoked potentials in subjects with normal and defective stereo vision. Doc Ophthalmol 101:233–246

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Leguire LE, Rogers GL, Bremer DL (1991) Visual-evoked response binocular summation in normal and strabismic. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 32:126–133

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. McCulloch DL, Skarf B (1991) Development of the human visual system: monocular and binocular pattern VEP latency. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 32:2372–2381

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mitsuyu M, Yanashima K (1982) Binocular additivity of visually evoked cortical potentials in man. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser 31:421–426

    Google Scholar 

  13. Shea SL, Aslin RN, McCulloch D (1987) Binocular VEP summation in infants and adults with abnormal binocular histories. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 28:356–365

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sloper JJ, Collins AD (1998) Reduction in binocular enhancement of the visual-evoked potential during development accompanies increasing stereoacuity. J Pediatr Ophthalmol 35:154–158

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Sloper JJ, Garnham C, Gous P, Dyason R, Plunkett D (2001) Reduced binocular responses and stereoacuity in patients with Duane syndrome. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 42:2826–2830

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Srebro R (1978) The visually evoked response—binocular facilitation and failure when binocular vision is disturbed. Arch Ophthalmol 96:839–844

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Wilson WB (1978) Visual-evoked responses differentiation of ischemic optic neuritis from the optic neuritis of multiple sclerosis. Am J Ophthalmol 86:530–535

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Duco I. Hamasaki (Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, Miami, Florida, USA) for his assistance and advice. This study was supported in a part by the Research Fund for Community Medicine, Japan and Grant-in Aid for scientific research from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture, Japan (15591843).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Ocular Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, 1-8-1 Inohana, Chuo-ku, 260-8670, Chiba, Japan

    Atsushi Mizota

  2. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Science, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan

    Atsushi Mizota, Akiko Hoshino, Emiko Adachi-Usami & Naoya Fujimoto

  3. Research Center for Frontier Medical Engineering, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan

    Atsushi Mizota

Authors
  1. Atsushi Mizota
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Akiko Hoshino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Emiko Adachi-Usami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Naoya Fujimoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Atsushi Mizota.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mizota, A., Hoshino, A., Adachi-Usami, E. et al. Binocular summation in visual evoked cortical potential in patients who have significantly different P100 peak latencies in their two eyes. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 242, 762–766 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-004-0899-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-004-0899-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation