Determining abnormal interocular latencies of multifocal visual evoked potentials

Donald C. Hood, Xian Zhang, Christopher Rodarte, Bo E. Yang, Nitin Ohri, Brad Fortune, Chris A. Johnson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

30 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To describe methods for measuring interocular latency differences of multifocal visual evoked potentials (mfVEP) and for determining regions with abnormal interocular latencies in patients. Methods: The mfVEPs from 100 individuals with normal visual fields and normal fundus examinations were analyzed. Individuals ranged in age from 21.6 to 92.4 years. The stimulus was a 60 sector, pattern-reversing dartboard display. Each sector had 16 checks, 8 white (200 cd/m2) and 8 black (< 1 cd/m2). Interocular latency was measured as the temporal shift producing the best cross-correlation value between the corresponding responses of each eye. The 'corrected interocular latency' was defined as the difference between this shift and the mean interocular latency (shift) for a particular sector and recording channel. Results: The variability of the corrected interocular latency decreased as the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the mfVEP responses increased. For example, the 95% confidence intervals decreased from over 16 ms to under 4 ms as SNR increased. Grouping and summing the responses also lead to an increase in SNR and a decrease in the confidence interval. The results of various cluster criteria were also derived. A cluster criterion (e.g. two or more contiguous points within a hemisphere exceeding a given confidence interval), can serve to increase the specificity for detection of eyes or individuals with abnormal interocular latencies. For example, while 21% of the eyes had 3 or more points exceeding the 5% confidence interval, only 1.8% of the eyes had a cluster of 3 or more of these points. Finally, interocular latency was only weakly correlated with age (r = 0.26). Conclusion: In testing for abnormalities in interocular latencies, the confidence interval should be based upon the SNR of the response. Grouping and summing responses to increase SNR or employing a cluster test may also prove useful.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)177-187
Number of pages11
JournalDocumenta Ophthalmologica
Volume109
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2004
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Visual Evoked Potentials
Signal-To-Noise Ratio
Confidence Intervals
Visual Fields

Keywords

  • Electrophysiology
  • Latency
  • Multifocal visual evoked potential
  • VEP

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ophthalmology

Cite this

Hood, D. C., Zhang, X., Rodarte, C., Yang, B. E., Ohri, N., Fortune, B., & Johnson, C. A. (2004). Determining abnormal interocular latencies of multifocal visual evoked potentials. Documenta Ophthalmologica, 109(2), 177-187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-004-5511-1

Determining abnormal interocular latencies of multifocal visual evoked potentials. / Hood, Donald C.; Zhang, Xian; Rodarte, Christopher; Yang, Bo E.; Ohri, Nitin; Fortune, Brad; Johnson, Chris A.

In: Documenta Ophthalmologica, Vol. 109, No. 2, 09.2004, p. 177-187.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hood, DC, Zhang, X, Rodarte, C, Yang, BE, Ohri, N, Fortune, B & Johnson, CA 2004, 'Determining abnormal interocular latencies of multifocal visual evoked potentials', Documenta Ophthalmologica, vol. 109, no. 2, pp. 177-187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10633-004-5511-1
Hood, Donald C. ; Zhang, Xian ; Rodarte, Christopher ; Yang, Bo E. ; Ohri, Nitin ; Fortune, Brad ; Johnson, Chris A. / Determining abnormal interocular latencies of multifocal visual evoked potentials. In: Documenta Ophthalmologica. 2004 ; Vol. 109, No. 2. pp. 177-187.
@article{62fb9ffab2304008a98fa8afe030f594,
title = "Determining abnormal interocular latencies of multifocal visual evoked potentials",
abstract = "Purpose: To describe methods for measuring interocular latency differences of multifocal visual evoked potentials (mfVEP) and for determining regions with abnormal interocular latencies in patients. Methods: The mfVEPs from 100 individuals with normal visual fields and normal fundus examinations were analyzed. Individuals ranged in age from 21.6 to 92.4 years. The stimulus was a 60 sector, pattern-reversing dartboard display. Each sector had 16 checks, 8 white (200 cd/m2) and 8 black (< 1 cd/m2). Interocular latency was measured as the temporal shift producing the best cross-correlation value between the corresponding responses of each eye. The 'corrected interocular latency' was defined as the difference between this shift and the mean interocular latency (shift) for a particular sector and recording channel. Results: The variability of the corrected interocular latency decreased as the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the mfVEP responses increased. For example, the 95{\%} confidence intervals decreased from over 16 ms to under 4 ms as SNR increased. Grouping and summing the responses also lead to an increase in SNR and a decrease in the confidence interval. The results of various cluster criteria were also derived. A cluster criterion (e.g. two or more contiguous points within a hemisphere exceeding a given confidence interval), can serve to increase the specificity for detection of eyes or individuals with abnormal interocular latencies. For example, while 21{\%} of the eyes had 3 or more points exceeding the 5{\%} confidence interval, only 1.8{\%} of the eyes had a cluster of 3 or more of these points. Finally, interocular latency was only weakly correlated with age (r = 0.26). Conclusion: In testing for abnormalities in interocular latencies, the confidence interval should be based upon the SNR of the response. Grouping and summing responses to increase SNR or employing a cluster test may also prove useful.",
keywords = "Electrophysiology, Latency, Multifocal visual evoked potential, VEP",
author = "Hood, {Donald C.} and Xian Zhang and Christopher Rodarte and Yang, {Bo E.} and Nitin Ohri and Brad Fortune and Johnson, {Chris A.}",
year = "2004",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1007/s10633-004-5511-1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "109",
pages = "177--187",
journal = "Documenta Ophthalmologica",
issn = "0012-4486",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Determining abnormal interocular latencies of multifocal visual evoked potentials

AU - Hood, Donald C.

AU - Zhang, Xian

AU - Rodarte, Christopher

AU - Yang, Bo E.

AU - Ohri, Nitin

AU - Fortune, Brad

AU - Johnson, Chris A.

PY - 2004/9

Y1 - 2004/9

N2 - Purpose: To describe methods for measuring interocular latency differences of multifocal visual evoked potentials (mfVEP) and for determining regions with abnormal interocular latencies in patients. Methods: The mfVEPs from 100 individuals with normal visual fields and normal fundus examinations were analyzed. Individuals ranged in age from 21.6 to 92.4 years. The stimulus was a 60 sector, pattern-reversing dartboard display. Each sector had 16 checks, 8 white (200 cd/m2) and 8 black (< 1 cd/m2). Interocular latency was measured as the temporal shift producing the best cross-correlation value between the corresponding responses of each eye. The 'corrected interocular latency' was defined as the difference between this shift and the mean interocular latency (shift) for a particular sector and recording channel. Results: The variability of the corrected interocular latency decreased as the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the mfVEP responses increased. For example, the 95% confidence intervals decreased from over 16 ms to under 4 ms as SNR increased. Grouping and summing the responses also lead to an increase in SNR and a decrease in the confidence interval. The results of various cluster criteria were also derived. A cluster criterion (e.g. two or more contiguous points within a hemisphere exceeding a given confidence interval), can serve to increase the specificity for detection of eyes or individuals with abnormal interocular latencies. For example, while 21% of the eyes had 3 or more points exceeding the 5% confidence interval, only 1.8% of the eyes had a cluster of 3 or more of these points. Finally, interocular latency was only weakly correlated with age (r = 0.26). Conclusion: In testing for abnormalities in interocular latencies, the confidence interval should be based upon the SNR of the response. Grouping and summing responses to increase SNR or employing a cluster test may also prove useful.

AB - Purpose: To describe methods for measuring interocular latency differences of multifocal visual evoked potentials (mfVEP) and for determining regions with abnormal interocular latencies in patients. Methods: The mfVEPs from 100 individuals with normal visual fields and normal fundus examinations were analyzed. Individuals ranged in age from 21.6 to 92.4 years. The stimulus was a 60 sector, pattern-reversing dartboard display. Each sector had 16 checks, 8 white (200 cd/m2) and 8 black (< 1 cd/m2). Interocular latency was measured as the temporal shift producing the best cross-correlation value between the corresponding responses of each eye. The 'corrected interocular latency' was defined as the difference between this shift and the mean interocular latency (shift) for a particular sector and recording channel. Results: The variability of the corrected interocular latency decreased as the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the mfVEP responses increased. For example, the 95% confidence intervals decreased from over 16 ms to under 4 ms as SNR increased. Grouping and summing the responses also lead to an increase in SNR and a decrease in the confidence interval. The results of various cluster criteria were also derived. A cluster criterion (e.g. two or more contiguous points within a hemisphere exceeding a given confidence interval), can serve to increase the specificity for detection of eyes or individuals with abnormal interocular latencies. For example, while 21% of the eyes had 3 or more points exceeding the 5% confidence interval, only 1.8% of the eyes had a cluster of 3 or more of these points. Finally, interocular latency was only weakly correlated with age (r = 0.26). Conclusion: In testing for abnormalities in interocular latencies, the confidence interval should be based upon the SNR of the response. Grouping and summing responses to increase SNR or employing a cluster test may also prove useful.

KW - Electrophysiology

KW - Latency

KW - Multifocal visual evoked potential

KW - VEP

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=16344390269&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=16344390269&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10633-004-5511-1

DO - 10.1007/s10633-004-5511-1

M3 - Article

VL - 109

SP - 177

EP - 187

JO - Documenta Ophthalmologica

JF - Documenta Ophthalmologica

SN - 0012-4486

IS - 2

ER -