Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Assessment of patients with suspected non-organic visual loss using pattern appearance visual evoked potentials

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

Abstract

Background

The aim of the study was to validate the use of the short duration pattern onset visual evoked potential (PappVEP) in the objective assessment of visual acuity (VA) in patients referred with presumed non-organic visual loss.

Methods

The combination of minimum check size and minimum contrast required to elicit a consistently discernible PappVEP (amplitude ≥5 μV) were measured in ten normal subjects under conditions of induced optical blur (0 to +3 dioptres) and the relationship to Snellen VA established. The data from 100 consecutive patients (167 eyes) referred for possible non-organic visual loss (NOVL) and 20 patients with confirmed visual pathway dysfunction were reviewed in relation to the results in normal subjects.

Results

Snellen VA, under conditions of blur, could be predicted in normal subjects from the check size and contrast required to elicit a criterion PappVEP. These data were tabulated and a quantitative guideline established for the estimation of VA in the patients referred with suspected NOVL. Most (88%) patients referred with suspected NOVL had normal electrophysiology and PappVEPs consistent with normal Snellen VA. In others, they suggested a degree of non-organic overlay. In 20 cases of organic visual loss, PappVEPs were in close agreement with subjective VA.

Conclusions

The short duration pattern onset visual-evoked potential is confirmed as a clinically useful tool in the objective assessment of patients with suspected non-organic visual loss.

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
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Arai M, Katsumi O, Paranhos FRL, Lopes De Faria JM, Hirose T (1997) Comparison of Snellen acuity and objective assessment using the spatial frequency sweep PVER. Graefe’s Arch Clin Ophthalmol 235:442–447

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Arden GB, Lewis DRH (1973) The pattern visual evoked response in the assessment of visual acuity. Clarke WN, Noël L-P. Trans Ophthalmol Soc UK 93:39–48

  3. Bach M, Hawlina M, Holder GE, Marmor MF, Meigan T, Vaegan, Miyake Y (2000) Standard for pattern electroretinography. Doc Ophthalmol 101:11–18

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bain KE, Beatty S, Lloyd C (2000) Non-organic visual loss. Eye 14:770–772

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Beatty S (1999) Non-organic visual loss. Postgrad Med J 75:201–207

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Barris MC, Kaufman DI, Barberio D (1992) Visual impairment in hysteria. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 33:1227–1232

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bobak P, Khanna P, Goodwin J, Brigell M (1993) Pattern visual evoked potentials in cases of ambiguous acuity loss. Doc Ophthamol 85:185–192

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Campbell FW, Maffei L (1970) Electrophysiological evidence for the existence of orientation and size detectors in the human visual system. 207:635–652

  9. Catalano RA, Simon JW, Krohel GB, Rosenberg PN (1986) Functional visual loss in children. Ophthalmology 93:385–390

    Google Scholar 

  10. Celesia GG, Archer CR, Kuroiwa Y et al (1980) Visual function of the extrageniculo-calcarine system in man. Arch Neurol 37:704–706

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Chiappa KH (1990) Evoked potentials in clinical medicine, 2nd edn. Raven Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  12. Clarke WN, Noël L-P, Bariciak M (1996) Functional visual loss in children: a common problem with an easy solution. Can J Ophthamol 31:311–313

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Fishman GA, Birch DG, Holder GE, Brigell MG (2001) Electrophysiologic testing in disorders of the retina, optic nerve and visual pathway 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA: The Foundation of the American Academy of Ophthalmology

  14. Holder GE (2006) Electrodiagnostic testing in malingering and hysteria. In: Heckenlively JR, Arden GB (eds) Principles and practice of clinical electrophysiology of vision. 1st ed. St. Louis: Mosby Year Book 573–577

  15. Howe JW, Mitchell KW, Robson C (1981) Electrophysiological assessment of visual acuity. Trans Ophthalmol Soc UK 101:105–108

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Howe JW, Mitchell KW, Robson C (1982) Some clinical experiences using contrast evoked potential techniques in organic and non-organic visual dysfunction. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser 31:353–360

    Google Scholar 

  17. Howe JW, Mitchell KW (1984) The objective assessment of contrast sensitivity by electrophysiological means. Br J Ophthalmol 68:626–638

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Jenkins TCA, Douthwaite WA (1988) An objective VER assessment of visual acuity compared with subjective measures. Am J Optom Physiol Optics 65:957–961

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Jetzel J, Parry N (2001) Minimising the effects of spatial non-linearities on VEP estimation of resolution limit. IOVS 42:5854 (ARVO abstract 4584-B603)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kathol RG, Cox TA, Corbett JJ, Thompson HS (1983) Functional visual loss: follow-up of 42 cases. Arch Ophthalmol 101:729–735

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Kramer KK, Piana FG, Appleton B (1979) Ocular malingering and hysteria: diagnosis and management. Surv Ophthalmol 24:89–96

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Kulikowski JJ (1972) Relation of psychophysics and electrophysiology. Trace (Paris) 6:64–69

    Google Scholar 

  23. Marmor MF, Holder GE, Seeliger MW, Yamamoto S (2004) Standard for clinical electroretinography (2004 update). Doc Ophthalmol 108:107–114

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Morgan RK, Nugent B, Harrison JM, O’Connor PS (1985) Voluntary alteration of pattern evoked responses. Ophthalmology 92:1356–1363

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Muller W, Schoeneich H (1989) Relationship between visual acuity, refraction, and the pattern reversal evoked potential in aphakia. Ophthalmologica 198:89–94

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Murray IJ and Kulikowski JJ (1983) VEPs and contrast. 23:1741–1743

  27. Odom JV, Bach M, Barber C, Brigell M, Marmor MF, Tormene AP, Holder GE, Vaegan (2004) Visual Evoked Potentials Standard. Doc Ophthalmol 108:115–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ohn Y-H, Katsumi O, Matsui Y, Tetsuka H, Hirose T (1994) Snellen visual acuity versus pattern reversal visual-evoked response acuity in clinical applications. Ophthalmic Res 26:240–252

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Parry NRA, Murray IJ, Hadjzenonous C (1999) Spatio-temporal tuning of VEPs: effect of mode of stimulation. Vision Res 39:3491–3497

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Raniel Y, Pratt H, Neumann E, Schacham SE (1989) Miniature fiber-optic pattern-reversal stimulator for determination of the visual evoked potential threshold; comparison with Snellen acuity. Graefe’s Arch Ophthalmol 227:212–215

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Regan D (1989) Human brain electrophysiology: evoked potentials and evoked magnetic fields in science and medicine, 1st edn. Elsevier, New York

    Google Scholar 

  32. Robson AG, Kulikowski JJ, Korostenskaja M, Neveu MM, Hogg CH, Holder GE (2003) Integration times reveal mechanisms responding to isoluminant chromatic gratings: a two centre visual evoked potential study. In: Mollon JD, Pokorny J, Knoblauch K (eds) Normal and defective colour vision. 1st ed. Oxford university press, New York, pp 130–137

    Google Scholar 

  33. Rover J, Bach M (1987) Pattern electroretinogram plus visual evoked potential: a decisive test in patients suspected of malingering. Doc Ophthalmol 66:245–251

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Skalka HW (1980) Comparison of Snellen acuity, VER acuity and Arden grating scores in macular and optic nerve diseases. Br J Ophthalmol 64:24–29

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Sokol S, Dobson V (1976) Pattern reversed visually evoked potentials in infants. Investig Ophthalmol 15:58–63

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Sokol S, Jones K, Nadler D (1983) Comparison of the spatial response properties of the human retina and cortex as measured by simultaneously recorded patter ERGs and VEPs. Vision Res 23:723–727

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Spekreijise H, Van der Tweel LH, Zuidema TH (1973) Contrast evoked responses in man. Vision Res 13:1577–1601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Steele M, Seiple WH, Carr RE, Klug R (1989) The clinical utility of visual-evoked potential acuity testing. Am J Ophthalmol 108:572–577

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Tan CT, Murray NMF, Sawyers D, Leonard TJK (1984) Deliberate alteration of the visual evoked potential. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiat 47:518–523

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Van Lithe G, Van Marle W, Bartl G, Vijfwinkel-Bruininga S (1976) Visual acuity and checkerboard potentials with defocusing lenses. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Ser 13:13–19

    Google Scholar 

  41. Xu S, Meyer D, Yoser S, Mathews D, Elfervig JL (2001) Pattern visual evoked potential in the diagnosis of functional visual loss. Ophthalmology 108:76–81

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Brecelj J (2003) From immature to mature pattern ERG and VEP. Doc Ophthalmol 107:215–224

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Emmerson-Hannover R, Shearer DE, Creel DJ, Dustman RE (1994) Pattern reversal evoked potentials: gender differences and age-related changes in amplitude and latency. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 92:93–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the technicians in the electrophysiology department for performing the clinical testing on many of the patients and Catey Bunce for her statistical advice.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Electrophysiology, Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, EC1V 2PD, UK

    Vikki A. McBain, Anthony G. Robson, Chris R. Hogg & Graham E. Holder

  2. Department of Ophthalmology, Institute of Medical Sciences, Forresterhill, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK

    Vikki A. McBain

Authors
  1. Vikki A. McBain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anthony G. Robson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chris R. Hogg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Graham E. Holder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vikki A. McBain.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McBain, V.A., Robson, A.G., Hogg, C.R. et al. Assessment of patients with suspected non-organic visual loss using pattern appearance visual evoked potentials. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 245, 502–510 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-006-0431-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00417-006-0431-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation