Effect of Eccentricity on Pattern-pulse Multifocal VEP

被引:0
作者
Alexander I. Klistorner
Stuart L. Graham
机构
[1] Sydney Eye Hospital,Save Sight Institute
来源
Documenta Ophthalmologica | 2005年 / 110卷
关键词
multifocal VEP; pattern-reversal stimulation; pattern-pulse stimulation;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Purpose: The sparse pattern-pulse stimulation has been suggested to produce better cortical evoked responses compared to pattern reversal stimulation. This study examines varying pattern-pulse states and the effect of eccentricity of the stimulated visual field on the response amplitude and latency. Method: The multifocal visual evoked potential (mfVEP) was recorded using AccumapTM. 58 close-packed checkerboard segments in a dartboard configuration were used. The best configuration for pattern-pulse stimulation was determined. This optimal stimulus condition was then compared to pattern-reversal stimulation at different eccentricities of visual field.in terms of latency and signal/noise ratio (SNR) of mfVEP amplitude. Results: The maximal response was seen when each element “1” of the binary sequence was represented by two “pattern on” frames followed by two “pattern off” frames while each element “0” of the binary sequence is represented by four “pattern off” frames. There was a significant overall increase of SNR using this pattern-pulse stimulating mode (SNR=15.5±3.8) compared with pattern-reversal stimulation (SNR=12.4±2.6). However, this was strongly dependant on eccentricity. In rings 1, 2 and 3 SNR improved by 48%, 43% and 26% respectively with ring 4 the effect was marginal and ring 5 was not significantly different. There was also a significant delay (10.1±5.3 msec) of the mfVEP response in pattern-pulse stimulation compared to pattern-reversal. Conclusions: The pattern-pulse method offers some advantages for achieving larger mfVEP signals from the central visual field. However, the more peripheral field where it is the most difficult to obtain signals, does not show any benefit.
引用
收藏
页码:209 / 218
页数:9
相关论文
共 90 条
  • [1] Baseler HA(1994)The topography of visual evoked response properties across the visual field Electroencephal. Clin. Neurophysiol 90 65-81
  • [2] Sutter EE(1998)Multifocal topographic visual evoked potential: improving objective detection of local visual field defects Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 39 937-950
  • [3] Klein SA(2000)Multifocal ERG and VEP responses and visual fields: Comparing disease-related changes Documenta Ophthalmologica 100 115-37
  • [4] Carney T.(2000)Tracking the recovery of local optic nerve function after optic neuritis: A multifocal VEP study Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 41 4032-4038
  • [5] Klistorner AI(2000)Objective perimetry in glaucoma Ophthalmology 107 2283-2299
  • [6] Graham SL(2002)Multifocal objective perimetry in the detection of glaucomatous field loss American Journal of Ophthalmology 133 29-39
  • [7] Grigg JR(2002)field defects and multifocal visual evoked potentials Arch Ophthalmol 120 1672-1681
  • [8] Billson FA.(2003)Conventional pattern-reversal VEPs are not equivalent to summed multifocal VEPs Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 44 1367-1375
  • [9] Hood DC(2003)The pattern-pulse multifocal visual evoked potential Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 44 879-890
  • [10] Zhang X.(1999)pattern VEP perimetry:analysis of sectoral waveforms Doc Ophthalmol 98 183-196