Evaluation of VEP perimetry in normal subjects and glaucoma patients

Acta Ophthalmologica Scandinavica

Volumn 80, Issue 6, 2002, Pages 620-626

  Bengtsson, Boel ^a   Choong, Yee Fong ^b  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b NONE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Glaucoma; Sensitivity; Specificity; VEP perimetry

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; DISEASE SEVERITY; EVOKED VISUAL RESPONSE; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; MALE; PERIMETER; PERIMETRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIABILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; VISUAL ACUITY; VISUAL FIELD; VISUAL FIELD DEFECT;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; EVOKED POTENTIALS, VISUAL; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PERIMETRY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VISION DISORDERS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 0036919316     PISSN: 13953907     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0420.2002.800612.x     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Åsman P & Heijl A (1992): Glaucoma Hemifield Test. Automated visual field evaluation. Arch Ophthalmol 110: 812-819.
2. Aulhorn E & Harms H (1967): Early visual defects in glaucoma. In: Leydhecker W, ed. Glaucoma, Tützing Symposium Basel. New York: S Karger AG. 151-186.
3. Baseler HA, Sutter EE, Klein SA & Carney T (1994): The topography of visual evoked response properties across the visual field. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 90: 65-81.
4. Bengtsson B & Heijl A (1998): SITA Fast, a new rapid perimetric threshold test. Description of methods and evaluation in patients with manifest and suspect glaucoma. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 76: 431-437.
5. Bobak P, Bodis-Wollner I, Harmois C, Maffei L, Mylin L, Podos S & Thorton J (1983): Pattern electroretinograms and visual-evoked potentials in glaucoma and multiple sclerosis. Am J Ophthalmol 96: 72-83.
6. Cappin JM & Nessim S (1975): Visual evoked responses in the assessment of field defects in glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 93: 9-18.
7. Caprioli J & Miller JM (1988): Correlation of structure and function in glaucoma. Quantitative measurements of disc and field. Ophthalmology 95: 723-727.
8. Celesia GG, Kaufman D & Cone S (1987): Effects of age and sex on pattern electroretinograms and visual evoked potentials. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 68: 161-171.
9. Funk J, Bornschereuer C & Grehn F (1988): Neuroretinal rim area and visual field in glaucoma. Graefe's Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 226: 431-434.
10. Goldberg I, Graham SL & Klistorner AI (2002): Multifocal objective perimetry in the detection of glaucomatous field loss. Am J Ophthalmol 133: 29-39.
11. Graham SJ, Klistorner AI, Grigg JR & Billson FA (2000): Objective VEP Perimetry in glaucoma: asymmetry analysis to identify early defects. J Glaucoma 9: 10-19.
12. Heijl A & Bengtsson B (1996): The effect of perimetric experience in patients with glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol 114: 19-22.
13. Heijl A, Lindgren G & Olsson J (1987a): Reliability parameters in computerized perimetry. In: Greve, E & Heijl A, eds. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Series 49. Proceedings of the 7th International Perimetric Society Meeting 1986. Dordrecht: Junk Publishers. 593-600.
14. Heijl A, Lindgren G & Olsson J (1987b): A package for statistical analysis of computerized visual fields. In: Greve, E & Heijl A, eds. Doc Ophthalmol Proc Series 49. Proceedings of the 7th International Perimetric Society Meeting 1986. Dordrecht: Junk Publishers. 153-168.
15. Heijl A, Lindgren G & Olsson J (1987c): Normal variability of static perimetric threshold values across the central visual field. Arch Ophthalmol 105: 1544-1549.
16. Heijl A, Lindgren G, Olsson J & Åsman P (1989): Visual field interpretation with empirical probability maps. Arch Ophthalmol 107: 204-208.
17. Hood DC, Zhang X, Greenstein C, Kangovi S, Odel JG, Liebmann JM & Ritch R (2000): An interocular comparison of the multifocal VEP: a possible technique for detecting local damage to the optic nerve. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 41: 1580-1587.
18. Horn FK, Jonas JB, Martus CY & Budde WM (1999): Polarmetric measurement of retinal nerve fibre layer thickness in glaucoma diagnosis. J Glaucoma 8: 353-362.
19. Howe JW & Mitchell KW (1992): Electrophysiologically determined contrast sensitivity in patients with ocular hypertension and chronic glaucoma. Doc Ophthalmol 80: 31-41.
20. Klistorner A & Graham SL (2000): Objective perimetry in glaucoma. Ophthalmology 107: 2283-2299.
21. Klistorner AI & Graham SL (2001): Electroencephalogram-based scaling of multifocal visual evoked potentials: effect on intersubject amplitude variability. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 42: 2145-2152.
22. Klistorner AI, Graham SL, Grigg JR & Billson FA (1998a): Electrode position and the multi-focal visual-evoked potential: role in objective visual field assessment. Aust N Z J Ophthalmol 26: 91-94.
23. Klistorner AI, Graham SL, Grigg JR & Billson FA (1998b): Multifocal Topographic visual evoked potential: improving objective detection of local visual field defects. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 39: 937-950.
24. Miglior S, Brigatti L, Lonati C, Rossetti L, Perrottet C & Orzalesi N (1996): Correlation between the progression of optic disc and visual field changes in glaucoma. Curr Eye Res 15: 145-149.
25. Miglior S, Casula M, Guareschi M, Marchetti I, Iester M & Orzalesi N (2001): Clinical ability of Heidelberg retinal tomograph examination to detect glaucomatous visual field changes. Ophthalmology 108: 1621-1627.
26. Mitchell KW, Howe JW & Spencer SR (1987): Visual evoked potentials in the older population: age and gender effects. Clin Phys Physiol Measure 44: 41-46.
27. Odberg T, Jakobsen JE, Staale J, Hultgren SJ & Halseide R (2001): The impact of glaucoma on the quality of life of patients in Norway. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 79: 116-120.
28. Rolando M, Macri A & Iester M (1999): Optic disc surface smoothness and visual field indices. Graefe's Arch Clin Ophthalmol 237: 372-376.
29. Tschopp C, Safran AB, Vivani P, Bullinger A, Reichert M & Mermoud C (1998): Automated visual field examination in children aged 5-8 years. Part I: Experimental validation of testing procedure. Vision Res 38: 2203-2210.
30. Van Coevorden RE, Mills RP, Chen YY & Barneby HS (2002): Continuous visual field test supervision may not always be necessary Ophthalmology 106: 178-181.
31. Wood JM, Wild JM, Hussey MK & Crews SJ (1987): Serial examination of the normal visual field using Octopus automated projection perimetry: evidence for a learning effect. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 65: 326-333.