Interocular amplitude and latency differences of pattern ERG and pattern VEP parameters

I. Fejes, Péter Balázs Kocsis, G. Benedek, Márta Janáky

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the normal interocular differences in amplitudes and peak times of the pattern electroretinograms (PERGs) and pattern visual evoked potentials (PVEPs) and to investigate whether the PERG and PVEP parameters correspond in lateral dominance or whether the eye-side distributions of the functional parameters are similar. Methods: The PERGs and PVEPs were recorded in healthy subjects (N = 77) according to the standards of the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision, with the modification of the check size of the PERG to 0.5 degrees. This allows stimulation of the macular ganglion cells and their corresponding visual pathways in healthy subjects. RESULTS: Comparison of the averaged higher and lower response amplitudes and the shorter and longer response peak times showed significant differences (p <0.001) in both the PERG and the PVEP parameters (median [5 to 95%]): the P50 (1.92% [0 to 5.48%]) and N95 (2.06% [0 to 13.95%]) peak times and the P50 (11.82% [1.32 to 29.93%) and N95 (9.45% [1.17 to 30.38%]) amplitudes of the PERGs and the P100 (1.04% [0 to 4.15%]) and N135 (1.96% [0 to 12.36%]) peak times and the P100 (9.86% [1.26 to 29.76%]) and N135 (11.19% [1.18 to 29.99%]) amplitudes of the PVEPs. No significant correlation was found concerning the eye dominance of the PERG and PVEP parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Our results reveal a significant interocular difference on PERG and PVEP recording, but this could not be ascribed to the anatomy of the retina and related visual pathways. If the difference between the eyes is not taken into account, misinterpretation may occur in a pathological process.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)472-476
Number of pages5
JournalOptometry and Vision Science
Volume91
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Visual Evoked Potentials
Visual Pathways
Healthy Volunteers
ocular Dominance
Pathologic Processes
Ganglia
Retina
Anatomy

Keywords

  • Interocular difference
  • Pattern electroretinography
  • Visual evoked potential

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology
  • Optometry
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Interocular amplitude and latency differences of pattern ERG and pattern VEP parameters. / Fejes, I.; Kocsis, Péter Balázs; Benedek, G.; Janáky, Márta.

In: Optometry and Vision Science, Vol. 91, No. 4, 2014, p. 472-476.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{307244a99e1e4f86b63cb78b2aee5dcd,
title = "Interocular amplitude and latency differences of pattern ERG and pattern VEP parameters",
abstract = "PURPOSE: To determine the normal interocular differences in amplitudes and peak times of the pattern electroretinograms (PERGs) and pattern visual evoked potentials (PVEPs) and to investigate whether the PERG and PVEP parameters correspond in lateral dominance or whether the eye-side distributions of the functional parameters are similar. Methods: The PERGs and PVEPs were recorded in healthy subjects (N = 77) according to the standards of the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision, with the modification of the check size of the PERG to 0.5 degrees. This allows stimulation of the macular ganglion cells and their corresponding visual pathways in healthy subjects. RESULTS: Comparison of the averaged higher and lower response amplitudes and the shorter and longer response peak times showed significant differences (p <0.001) in both the PERG and the PVEP parameters (median [5 to 95{\%}]): the P50 (1.92{\%} [0 to 5.48{\%}]) and N95 (2.06{\%} [0 to 13.95{\%}]) peak times and the P50 (11.82{\%} [1.32 to 29.93{\%}) and N95 (9.45{\%} [1.17 to 30.38{\%}]) amplitudes of the PERGs and the P100 (1.04{\%} [0 to 4.15{\%}]) and N135 (1.96{\%} [0 to 12.36{\%}]) peak times and the P100 (9.86{\%} [1.26 to 29.76{\%}]) and N135 (11.19{\%} [1.18 to 29.99{\%}]) amplitudes of the PVEPs. No significant correlation was found concerning the eye dominance of the PERG and PVEP parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Our results reveal a significant interocular difference on PERG and PVEP recording, but this could not be ascribed to the anatomy of the retina and related visual pathways. If the difference between the eyes is not taken into account, misinterpretation may occur in a pathological process.",
keywords = "Interocular difference, Pattern electroretinography, Visual evoked potential",
author = "I. Fejes and Kocsis, {P{\'e}ter Bal{\'a}zs} and G. Benedek and M{\'a}rta Jan{\'a}ky",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1097/OPX.0000000000000193",
language = "English",
volume = "91",
pages = "472--476",
journal = "Optometry and Vision Science",
issn = "1040-5488",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Interocular amplitude and latency differences of pattern ERG and pattern VEP parameters

AU - Fejes, I.

AU - Kocsis, Péter Balázs

AU - Benedek, G.

AU - Janáky, Márta

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - PURPOSE: To determine the normal interocular differences in amplitudes and peak times of the pattern electroretinograms (PERGs) and pattern visual evoked potentials (PVEPs) and to investigate whether the PERG and PVEP parameters correspond in lateral dominance or whether the eye-side distributions of the functional parameters are similar. Methods: The PERGs and PVEPs were recorded in healthy subjects (N = 77) according to the standards of the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision, with the modification of the check size of the PERG to 0.5 degrees. This allows stimulation of the macular ganglion cells and their corresponding visual pathways in healthy subjects. RESULTS: Comparison of the averaged higher and lower response amplitudes and the shorter and longer response peak times showed significant differences (p <0.001) in both the PERG and the PVEP parameters (median [5 to 95%]): the P50 (1.92% [0 to 5.48%]) and N95 (2.06% [0 to 13.95%]) peak times and the P50 (11.82% [1.32 to 29.93%) and N95 (9.45% [1.17 to 30.38%]) amplitudes of the PERGs and the P100 (1.04% [0 to 4.15%]) and N135 (1.96% [0 to 12.36%]) peak times and the P100 (9.86% [1.26 to 29.76%]) and N135 (11.19% [1.18 to 29.99%]) amplitudes of the PVEPs. No significant correlation was found concerning the eye dominance of the PERG and PVEP parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Our results reveal a significant interocular difference on PERG and PVEP recording, but this could not be ascribed to the anatomy of the retina and related visual pathways. If the difference between the eyes is not taken into account, misinterpretation may occur in a pathological process.

AB - PURPOSE: To determine the normal interocular differences in amplitudes and peak times of the pattern electroretinograms (PERGs) and pattern visual evoked potentials (PVEPs) and to investigate whether the PERG and PVEP parameters correspond in lateral dominance or whether the eye-side distributions of the functional parameters are similar. Methods: The PERGs and PVEPs were recorded in healthy subjects (N = 77) according to the standards of the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision, with the modification of the check size of the PERG to 0.5 degrees. This allows stimulation of the macular ganglion cells and their corresponding visual pathways in healthy subjects. RESULTS: Comparison of the averaged higher and lower response amplitudes and the shorter and longer response peak times showed significant differences (p <0.001) in both the PERG and the PVEP parameters (median [5 to 95%]): the P50 (1.92% [0 to 5.48%]) and N95 (2.06% [0 to 13.95%]) peak times and the P50 (11.82% [1.32 to 29.93%) and N95 (9.45% [1.17 to 30.38%]) amplitudes of the PERGs and the P100 (1.04% [0 to 4.15%]) and N135 (1.96% [0 to 12.36%]) peak times and the P100 (9.86% [1.26 to 29.76%]) and N135 (11.19% [1.18 to 29.99%]) amplitudes of the PVEPs. No significant correlation was found concerning the eye dominance of the PERG and PVEP parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Our results reveal a significant interocular difference on PERG and PVEP recording, but this could not be ascribed to the anatomy of the retina and related visual pathways. If the difference between the eyes is not taken into account, misinterpretation may occur in a pathological process.

KW - Interocular difference

KW - Pattern electroretinography

KW - Visual evoked potential

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84897914392&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84897914392&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/OPX.0000000000000193

DO - 10.1097/OPX.0000000000000193

M3 - Article

C2 - 24492757

AN - SCOPUS:84897914392

VL - 91

SP - 472

EP - 476

JO - Optometry and Vision Science

JF - Optometry and Vision Science

SN - 1040-5488

IS - 4

ER -