Latency of the pupil light reflex: sample rate, stimulus intensity, and variation in normal subjects.

PURPOSE To investigate the clinical usefulness of the latency of the pupil light reflex by optimizing its measurement, characterizing its variability, and determining the sensitivity of pupil latency as a function of stimulus input in normal subjects. METHODS Computerized binocular infrared pupillography was performed in 14 eyes of seven healthy subjects. Pupils were recorded simultaneously at 60 and 1000 Hz. Each eye was alternatively stimulated eight times for 50 ms every 2.5 seconds, increasing by 0.5 log units over a 2.0-log-unit range. To determine intersubject and intereye variability, 98 eyes of 49 healthy subjects were recorded at 60 Hz over a 3.0-log-unit range (15 degrees radius stimulation, four repetitions at each intensity). RESULTS Accuracy and resolution of latency were limited by the number of light reflexes used to estimate the average latency and were significantly affected by sampling rate when the number of reflexes recorded was fewer than four. Binocular recording and interpolation of the 60-Hz recording to 300 Hz added resolution to the latency. Biological variability contributed more to interindividual variability than did measurement variability. The range of intereye afferent asymmetry of latency in normal subjects was only between 8.3 and 35 ms-less with brighter stimulus intensity. CONCLUSIONS An optimal method for determination of the onset of the pupil light reflex was devised that consisted of filtering, interpolation of pupil recordings, and analysis of the first and second derivative of the pupil movement. Most of the variability in latency as a function of intensity in normal subjects was due to interindividual variation and latency was well matched between the two eyes of the subjects.

[1]  Johann Benedict Listing,et al.  Beitrag zur physiologischen Optik , 1845 .

[2]  M. Alpern,et al.  Relation of visual latency to intensity. , 1954, A.M.A. archives of ophthalmology.

[3]  M. Alpern,et al.  The Dependence of the Photopupil Response on Flash Duration and Intensity , 1963, The Journal of general physiology.

[4]  THE PUPIL AS INDICATOR OF RETINAL ACTIVITY. , 1964, American journal of ophthalmology.

[5]  A. Savitzky,et al.  Smoothing and Differentiation of Data by Simplified Least Squares Procedures. , 1964 .

[6]  Latency of pupillary reflex to light stimulation and its relationship to aging. , 1965 .

[7]  E. Schubert,et al.  [Influence of different adaptation on the threshold as well as the stimulus strength dependency of latency and amplitude in the human consensual pupillary reflex]. , 1967, Pflugers Archiv fur die gesamte Physiologie des Menschen und der Tiere.

[8]  R M Boynton,et al.  Latency variation in human pupil contraction due to stimulus luminance and/or adaptation level. , 1969, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[9]  D A Newsome,et al.  Iris mechanics. I. Influence of pupil size on dynamics of pupillary movements. , 1971, American journal of ophthalmology.

[10]  W. Mcdonald,et al.  Delayed visual evoked response in optic neuritis. , 1972, Lancet.

[11]  Pupillomotor latent period , 1977, Vision Research.

[12]  S. D. Miller,et al.  Pupil cycle time in optic neuritis. , 1978, American journal of ophthalmology.

[13]  H. Diener,et al.  Follow-up studies of visual potentials in multiple sclerosis evoked by checkerboard and foveal stimulation. , 1980, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[14]  C. Ellis,et al.  The pupillary light reflex in normal subjects. , 1981, The British journal of ophthalmology.

[15]  H. Krastel,et al.  The latent period of the pupil light reflex in lesions of the optic nerve. , 1981, Ophthalmologica. Journal international d'ophtalmologie. International journal of ophthalmology. Zeitschrift fur Augenheilkunde.

[16]  T. Cox,et al.  Visual Evoked Potential and Pupillary Signs: A Comparison in Optic Nerve Disease , 1982 .

[17]  J. Halter,et al.  Quantitative Evaluation of Sympathetic and Parasympathetic Control of Iris Function , 1982, Diabetes Care.

[18]  Pupillary light reflex in amblyopia. , 1984, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[19]  J. Halter,et al.  Correlations Among Autonomic, Sensory, and Motor Neural Function Tests in Untreated Non-insulin-dependent Diabetic Individuals , 1985, Diabetes Care.

[20]  R. Nickalls.  The rotating Pulfrich effect, and a new method of determining visual latency differences , 1986, Vision Research.

[21]  J. Bos,et al.  Assessment of pupillary light reflex latency and darkness adapted pupil size in control subjects and in diabetic patients with and without cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy. , 1990, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[22]  J. Jakobsen.  Pupillary function in multiple sclerosis , 1990, Acta neurologica Scandinavica.

[23]  R. Kardon,et al.  Automated pupil perimetry. Pupil field mapping in patients and normal subjects. , 1991, Ophthalmology.

[24]  C. Polman,et al.  Pupillary light reflex latency in patients with multiple sclerosis. , 1992, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[25]  R. Kardon,et al.  The pupil photostress test. , 1994, Ophthalmology.

[26]  Pupillary function in human amblyopia , 1994, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[27]  A Kawasaki,et al.  Variability of the relative afferent pupillary defect. , 1996, American journal of ophthalmology.

[28]  A. Kawasaki,et al.  Long-term fluctuation of relative afferent pupillary defect in subjects with normal visual function. , 1996, American journal of ophthalmology.

[29]  Pulfrich revisited. , 1997, Survey of ophthalmology.

[30]  O. Bergamin,et al.  The influence of iris color on the pupillary light reflex , 1998, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[31]  D. Mojon,et al.  A bedside test to determine motion stereopsis using the Pulfrich phenomenon. , 1998, Ophthalmology.

[32]  H. Lüdtke,et al.  Pupillary light reflexes in patients with Leber’s hereditary optic neuropathy , 1999, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[33]  J. Frederiksen,et al.  Serial visual evoked potentials in 90 untreated patients with acute optic neuritis. , 1999, Survey of ophthalmology.

[34]  R. Kardon,et al.  Comparison of pupil perimetry and visual perimetry in normal eyes: decibel sensitivity and variability. , 2001, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[35]  Lawrence W. Stark,et al.  Level dependent signal flow in the light pupil reflex , 2004, Biological Cybernetics.

[36]  C. Pulfrich.  Die Stereoskopie im Dienste der isochromen und heterochromen Photometrie , 2005, Naturwissenschaften.

[37]  C. Pulfrich,et al.  Die Stereoskopie im Dienste der isochromen und heterochromen Photometrie , 2005, Naturwissenschaften.