Comparing multifocal VEP and standard automated perimetry in high-risk ocular hypertension and early glaucoma

Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Volumn 48, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 1173-1180

  Fortune, Brad ^a   Demirel, Shaban ^a   Zhang, Xian ^b   Hood, Donald C ^b   Patterson, Emily ^a   Jamil, Annisa ^a   Mansberger, Steven L ^a   Cioffi, George A ^a   Johnson, Chris A ^a  

^a DEVERS EYE INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVOKED VISUAL RESPONSE; EYE; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMAN; INTRAOCULAR HYPERTENSION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OPTIC DISK; OPTIC NERVE DISEASE; PERIMETRY; PHOTOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VISUAL FIELD; COMPARATIVE STUDY; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; REPRODUCIBILITY; VISUAL DISORDER;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; EVOKED POTENTIALS, VISUAL; FEMALE; GLAUCOMA; HUMANS; INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OCULAR HYPERTENSION; OPTIC DISK; OPTIC NERVE DISEASES; PERIMETRY; PHOTOGRAPHY; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VISION DISORDERS; VISUAL FIELDS;

EID: 34047248891     PISSN: 01460404     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/iovs.06-0561     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Klistorner AI, Graham SL, Grigg JR, Billson FA. Multifocal topographic visual evoked potential: improving objective detection of local visual field defects. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 1998;39:937-950.
2. Klistorner A, Graham SL. Objective perimetry in glaucoma. Ophthalmology. 2000;107:2283-2299.
3. Graham SL, Klistorner AI, Grigg JR, Billson FA. Objective VEP perimetry in glaucoma: asymmetry analysis to identify early deficits. J Glaucoma. 2000;9:10-19.
4. Hood DC, Zhang X, Greenstein VC, et al. An interocular comparison of the multifocal VEP: a possible technique for detecting local damage to the optic nerve. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2000;41:1580-1587.
5. Hood DC, Zhang X. Multifocal ERG and VEP responses and visual fields: comparing disease-related changes. Doc Ophthalmol. 2000;100:115-137.
6. Hasegawa S, Abe H. Mapping of glaucomatous visual field defects by multifocal VEPs. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:3341-3348.
7. Bengtsson B. Evaluation of VEP perimetry in normal subjects and glaucoma patients. Acta Ophthalmol Scand. 2002;80:620-626.
8. Goldberg I, Graham SL, Klistorner AI. Multifocal objective perimetry in the detection of glaucomatous field loss. Am J Ophthalmol. 2002;133:29-39.
9. Fortune B, Goh K, Demirel S, et al. Detection of glaucomatous visual field loss using the multifocal visual evoked potential. In: Henson DB, Wall M, eds. Perimetry Update 2002/2003; Proceedings of the XVth International Perimetric Society Meeting. The Hague: Kugler; 2003;251-260.
10. Thienprasiddhi P, Greenstein VC, Chen CS, et al. Multifocal visual evoked potential responses in glaucoma patients with unilateral hemifield defects. Am J Ophthalmol. 2003;136:34-40.
11. Hood DC, Greenstein VC. Multifocal VEP and ganglion cell damage: applications and limitations for the study of glaucoma. Prog Retin Eye Res. 2003;22:201-251.
12. Bjerre A, Grigg JR, Parry NR, Henson DB. Test-retest variability of multifocal visual evoked potential and SITA standard perimetry in glaucoma. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45:4035-4040.
13. Hood DC, Thienprasiddhi P, Greenstein VC, et al. Detecting early to mild glaucomatous damage: a comparison of the multifocal VEP and automated perimetry. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2004;45:492-498.
14. Graham SL, Klistorner AI, Goldberg I. Clinical application of objective perimetry using multifocal visual evoked potentials in glaucoma practice. Arch Ophthalmol. 2005;123:729-739.
15. Baseler HA, Sutter EE, Klein SA, Carney T. The topography of visual evoked response properties across the visual field. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1994;90:65-81.
16. Hood DC, Zhang X, Hong JE, Chen CS. Quantifying the benefits of additional channels of multifocal VEP recording. Doc Ophthalmol. 2002;104:303-320.
17. Klistorner AI, Graham SL. Electroencephalogram-based scaling of multifocal visual evoked potentials: effect on intersubject amplitude variability. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:2145-2152.
18. Zhang X, Hood DC, Chen CS, Hong JE. A signal-to-noise analysis of multifocal VEP responses: an objective definition for poor records. Doc Ophthalmol. 2002;104:287-302.
19. Bowd C, Zangwill LM, Berry CC, et al. Detecting early glaucoma by assessment of retinal nerve fiber layer thickness and visual function. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2001;42:1993-2003.
20. Hood DC, Zhang X, Winn BJ. Detecting glaucomatous damage with multifocal visual evoked potentials: how can a monocular test work? J Glaucoma. 2003;12:3-15.
21. Gordon MO, Beiser JA, Brandt JD, et al. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study: baseline factors that predict the onset of primary open-angle glaucoma. Arch Ophthalmol. 2002;120:714-720; discussion 829-730.
22. Johnson CA, Sample PA, Cioffi GA, Liebmann JR, Weinreb RN. Structure and function evaluation (SAFE): I. criteria for glaucomatous visual field loss using standard automated perimetry (SAP) and short wavelength automated perimetry (SWAP). Am J Ophthalmol. 2002;134:177-185.
23. Fortune B, Hood DC. Conventional pattern-reversal VEPs are not equivalent to summed multifocal VEPs. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2003;44:1364-1375.
24. Fortune B, Zhang X, Hood DC, Demirel S, Johnson CA. Normative ranges and specificity of the multifocal VEP. Doc Ophthalmol. 2004;109:87-100.
25. Fortune B, Demirel S, Zhang X, Hood DC, Johnson CA. Repeatability of normal multifocal VEP: implications for detecting progression. J Glaucoma. 2006;15:131-141.
26. Wollstein G, Garway-Heath DF, Hitchings RA. Identification of early glaucoma cases with the scanning laser ophthalmoscope. Ophthalmology. 1998;105:1557-1563.
27. Ford BA, Artes PH, McCormick TA, et al. Comparison of data analysis tools for detection of glaucoma with the Heidelberg Retina Tomograph. Ophthalmology. 2003;110:1145-1150.
28. Levine R, Demirel S, Fan J, et al. The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study Group. Asymmetries and visual field summaries as predictors of glaucoma in the ocular hypertension treatment study (OHTS). Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2006;47:3896-3903.
29. Keltner JL, Johnson CA, Quigg JM, et al. Confirmation of visual field abnormalities in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study. Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study Group. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000;118:1187-1194.
30. Mansberger SL, Sample PA, Zangwill L, Weinreb RN. Achromatic and short-wavelength automated perimetry in patients with glaucomatous large cups. Arch Ophthalmol. 1999;117:1473-1477.
31. Mansberger SL, Johnson CA, Cioffi GA, et al. Predictive value of frequency doubling technology perimetry for detecting glaucoma in a developing country. J Glaucoma. 2005;14:128-134.
32. Keltner JL, Johnson CA, Anderson DR, et al. The association between glaucomatous visual fields and optic nerve head features in the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study. Ophthalmology. 2006;113:1603-1612.