Premium
Do visual evoked potentials give relevant information to the neuro‐ophthalmological examination in optic nerve lesions?
Author(s) -
Nikoskelainen Eeva,
Falck Björn
Publication year - 1982
Publication title -
acta neurologica scandinavica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.967
H-Index - 95
eISSN - 1600-0404
pISSN - 0001-6314
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0404.1982.tb03128.x
Subject(s) - optic neuritis , visual field , optic nerve , visual acuity , ophthalmoscopy , ophthalmology , medicine , neuro ophthalmology , pathological , color vision , multiple sclerosis , psychology , audiology , retinal , glaucoma , pathology , psychiatry , computer science , computer vision
The visual evoked potentials (VEPs) and neuro‐ophthalmological examinations of 134 patients were compared. The VEPs were abnormal in 95 % of the eyes with optic neuritis. Defective color vision was found in 99 %, visual field defects in 88 %, decreased vision in 66 % and an afferent pupillary defect in 55 %. 29 patients with optic neuritis were followed up with repeated tests. VEPs and color vision recovered more slowly than visual acuity and visual field. Abnormal VEPs were observed in 68 % of 50 MS patients. An analysis of symptomatic and asymptomatic eyes showed that testing of color vision, visual field and red‐free ophthalmoscopy were equally as useful diagnostic tools as VEPs. 4 (8 %) of the MS patients had abnormal VEPs despite a normal neuro‐ophthalmological examination; 94 % of MS patients with symptoms and 47 % of MS patients without visual symptoms had abnormal VEPs. VEPs were pathological in 59 % of 24 patients with traumatic or compressive optic nerve diseases or optic atrophies of unknown etiology. The neuro‐ophthalmological examination was more sensitive than VEPs in the diagnosis of these disorders. A neuro‐ophthalmological examination is in most cases sufficient to diagnose optic nerve lesions. VEPs are of diagnostic aid especially in mild optic nerve lesions.