Advertisement

Visually Evoked Cortical Potentials in Neurological Diagnosis

  • A. M. Halliday

Abstract

Pattern evoked response recording is a relatively new diagnostic technique which has shown itself to be particularly useful to the neurologist in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (Halliday, McDonald and Mushin, 1972, 1973a, 1976) and in the differentiation of organic and functional visual impairment (Halliday, 1972). The technique depends on measuring the small electrical potentials evoked by the arrival of a synchronous sensory volley at the cerebral cortex. When measured through the scalp, these potentials are only a few microvolts in size and they would be drowned in the much larger background electrical activity of the brain if one could not increase the sensitivity of the detection process. This can be done very effectively by adding a number of responses together and computing an average (Dawson, 1954).

Keywords

Multiple Sclerosis Optic Neuritis Visual Evoke Potential Cervical Spondylosis Cortical Potential 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arden, G B, Bodis-Wollner, I, Halliday, A M, Jeffreys, A, Kulikowski, J J, Spekreijse, H and Regan, D. (1976) Methodology of patterned visual stimulation. In: Desmedt, J F (ed.) New Developments in Visual Evoked Potentials in the Human Brain. London: Oxford University Press. In Press.Google Scholar
  2. Behrman, Joan, Halliday, A M and McDonald, W I. (1972) Visual evoked responses to flash and pattern in patients with retrobulbar neuritis. Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol. 33: 445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cappin, J M and Nissim, Sarah. (1975) Visual evoked responses in the assessment of field defects in glaucoma. Arch. Ophthalmol. 93: 9–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dawson, G D. (1954) A summation technique for the detection of small evoked responses. Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol. 6: 65–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Halliday, A M. (1968) Computing techniques in neurological diagnosis. Brit. med. Bull. 24: 253–259.Google Scholar
  6. Halliday, A M. (1972) Evoked responses in organic and functional sensory loss. In: Fessard, A and Lelord, G. (eds.) Activités evoquées et leur conditionnement chez l’homme normal et en pathologie mentale. Paris: Editions Inserm. 189–212.Google Scholar
  7. Halliday, A M, McDonald, W I and Mushin, Joan. (1972) Delayed visual evoked response in optic neuritis. Lancet (i): 982–985.Google Scholar
  8. Halliday, A M, McDonald, W I and Mushin, Joan. (1973a) The visual evoked response in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Brit. Med. J. (iv): 661–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Halliday, A M, McDonald, W I and Mushin, Joan. (1973b) Delayed pattern-evoked responses in optic neuritis in relation to visual acuity. Transactions of the Ophthalmological Society of the UK. 93: 315–324.Google Scholar
  10. Halliday, A M, McDonald, W I and Mushin, Joan. (1974) Delayed visual evoked responses in progressive spastic paraplegia. Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol. 37: 328.Google Scholar
  11. Halliday, A M, McDonald, W I and Mushin, Joan. (1975) Abnormalities of the pattern evoked potential in compression of the anterior visual pathways. Australian Journal of Ophthalmology. In Press.Google Scholar
  12. Halliday, A M, McDonald, W I and Mushin, Joan, (1976) Visual evoked potentials in patients with demyelinating disease. In: Desmedt, J F (ed.) New Developments in Visual Evoked Potentials in the Human Brain. London: Oxford University Press. In Press.Google Scholar
  13. Halliday, A M and Michael, W F. (1970) Changes in pattern-evoked responses in man associated with the vertical and horizontal meridians of the visual field. J. Physiol. 208: 499–513.Google Scholar
  14. Halliday, A M and Michael, W F. (1972) Pattern-evoked potentials and the cortical representation of the visual field. In: Somjen, G G (ed.) Neurophysiology studied in Man. Amsterdam: Excerpta Medica. 250–259.Google Scholar
  15. Halliday, A M and Pitman, J R. (1965) A digital computer averager for work on evoked responses. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 178: 23–24P.Google Scholar
  16. Hubel, D H and Wiesel, T N. (1962) Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat’s visual cortex. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 160: 106–154.Google Scholar
  17. Hubel, D H and Wiesel, T N. (1968) Receptive fields and functional architecture of monkey striate cortex. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 195: 215–243.Google Scholar
  18. McAlpine, D, Lumsden, C E and Acheson, E D. (1972) Multiple Sclerosis: a Reappraisal. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone. 202pp.Google Scholar
  19. McDonald, W I and Sears, T A. (1970) The effects of experimental demyelination on conduction in the central nervous system. Brain. 93: 583–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Michael, W F and Halliday, A M. (1971) Differences between the occipital distribution of upper and lower field pattern-evoked responses in man. Brain Res. 32: 311–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. M. Halliday
    • 1
  1. 1.Medical Research Council, Institute of NeurologyNational HospitalLondon WC1UK

Personalised recommendations