The effects of optic disc drusen on the latency of the pattern-reversal checkerboard and multifocal visual evoked potentials

Tomas M. Grippo, Isaac Ezon, Fabio N. Kanadani, Boonchai Wangsupadilok, Celso Tello, Jeffrey M. Liebmann, Robert Ritch, Donald C. Hood

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

9 Scopus citations

Abstract

PURPOSE. To determine the effect of optic disc drusen on the latency of the pattern-reversal checkerboard visual evoked potentials (VEPs) and multifocal (mf)VEPs and to better understand the pathophysiology of the condition. METHODS. Eighteen eyes with optic disc drusen (10 patients) and 38 control eyes (19 subjects) underwent VEP, mfVEP, and visual field testing. Only one eye of each individual, the one with the more affected visual field, was used in the analyses. The VEPs were recorded with a 15′ and 60′ reversing checkerboard pattern, and the mfVEPs were elicited by a 60-sector dartboard display. RESULTS. Unlike the VEP results, the mfVEP revealed a significant increase in the average monocular latency of the optic disc drusen group compared with that of the control group. The average mfVEP relative latency for the optic disc drusen group (4.1 ms) was greater than that (0.8 ms) in the control group. For monocular and interocular analyses, the average percentage of points delayed in the drusen group was significantly greater than that in the control group. CONCLUSIONS. Optic disc drusen produced significant latency delays on the mfVEP test but not on the VEP test, presumably due to the mfVEP's ability to detect the effects of local changes. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that local mechanical compression by optic disc drusen leads to abnormal retinal ganglion cell activity.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)4199-4204
Number of pages6
JournalInvestigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science
Volume50
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The effects of optic disc drusen on the latency of the pattern-reversal checkerboard and multifocal visual evoked potentials'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this