Comparison of isolated-check visual evoked potential and standard automated perimetry in early glaucoma and high-risk ocular hypertension

Apply

Comparison of isolated-check visual evoked potential and standard automated perimetry in early glaucoma and high-risk ocular hypertension

Journal Title: International Journal of Ophthalmology - Year 2017, Vol 10, Issue 4

Abstract

"AIM: To compare the diagnostic performance of isolated-check visual evoked potential (icVEP) and standard automated perimetry (SAP), for evaluating the application values of icVEP in the detection of early glaucoma. METHODS: Totally 144 subjects (288 eyes) were enrolled in this study. icVEP testing was performed with the Neucodia visual electrophysiological diagnostic system. A 15% positive-contrast (bright) condition pattern was used in this device to differentiate between glaucoma patients and healthy control subjects. Signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) were derived based on a multivariate statistic. The eyes were judged as abnormal if the test yielded an SNR≤1. SAP testing was performed with the Humphrey Field Analyzer II. The visual fields were deemed as abnormality if the glaucoma hemifield test results outside normal limits; or the pattern standard deviation with P<0.05; or the cluster of three or more non-edge points on the pattern deviation plot in a single hemifield with P<0.05, one of which must have a P<0.01. Disc photographs were graded as either glaucomatous optic neuropathy or normal by two experts who were masked to all other patient information. Moorfields regression analysis (MRA) used as a separate diagnostic classification was performed by Heidelberg retina tomograph (HRT). RESULTS: When the disc photograph grader was used as diagnostic standard, the sensitivity for SAP and icVEP was 32.3% and 38.5% respectively and specificity was 82.3% and 77.8% respectively. When the MRA Classifier was used as the diagnostic standard, the sensitivity for SAP and icVEP was 48.6% and 51.4% respectively and specificity was 84.1% and 78.0% respectively. When the combined structural assessment was used as the diagnostic standard, the sensitivity for SAP and icVEP was 59.2% and 53.1% respectively and specificity was 84.2% and 84.6% respectivlely. There was no statistical significance between the sensitivity or specificity of SAP and icVEP, regardless of which diagnostic standard was based on. CONCLUSION: The diagnostic performance of icVEP is not better than that of SAP in the detection of early glaucoma."

Authors and Affiliations

Ying-Xi Zhao

Keywords

isolated-check visual evoked potential. standard automated perimetry. signal-to-noise ratios. early glaucoma

Photorefractive keratectomy after cataract surgery in uncommon cases: long-term results

"AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the excimer laser correction of the residual refractive errors after cataract extraction with intraocular lens (IOL) implantation in uncommon cases. METHODS: Totally 24 patien...

Femtosecond laser-assisted deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty in phototherapeutic keratectomy versus the big-bubble technique in keratoconus

"AIM: To compare the functional and anatomic results of femtosecond laser (FSL)-assisted deep anterior lamellar keratoplasty (DALK) associated with phototherapeutic keratectomy (PTK) and FSL-assisted DALK performed using...

EP ID EP605171
DOI 10.18240/ijo.2017.04.16
Views 64
Downloads 0