The multifocal visual evoked potential.

With the multifocal technique, visual evoked potentials (VEPs) can be recorded simultaneously from many regions of the visual field. For the multifocal VEP (mfVEP), the patient views a display that typically contains 60 sectors, each with a checkerboard pattern. The display covers about the same retinal area as the 24-2 Humphrey visual field (HVF). However, due to the scaling of the sectors of the mfVEP display, the fields are sampled differently by the mfVEP and HVF. To assess local defects in the visual field, the mfVEP responses must be compared with normal controls. These comparisons require relatively sophisticated analyses and software. Whereas the mfVEP can be recorded relatively easily with the same equipment used to record multifocal electroretinograms (mfERGs), the software needed to perform the analysis is not yet widely available. The mfVEP is valuable for ruling out non-organic visual loss, diagnosing and following patients with optic neuritis/multiple sclerosis, evaluating patients with unreliable or questionable HVFs, and following disease progression. When combined with the mfERG, diseases of the outer retina (before the retinal ganglion cells) can be distinguished from diseases of the ganglion cells and/or optic nerve. The difficulties encountered in recording and analyzing mfVEP responses are greater than those involved in full-field VEP testing. Thus, in its current form, the mfVEP is best recorded and interpreted by ophthalmologists and electrophysiologists experienced with the technique. However, this technique is developing rapidly; advances in commercial hardware and software are expected in the near future.

[1]  Donald C. Hood,et al.  Multifocal ERG and VEP responses and visual fields: comparing disease-related changes , 2004, Documenta Ophthalmologica.

[2]  Donald C. Hood,et al.  Quantifying the benefits of additional channels of multifocal VEP recording , 2002, Documenta Ophthalmologica.

[3]  S. Klein,et al.  The topography of visual evoked response properties across the visual field. , 1994, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[4]  Michael Bach,et al.  Principles and practice of clinical electrophysiology of vision , 1991 .

[5]  S. Graham,et al.  Multifocal pattern VEP perimetry: analysis of sectoral waveforms , 2004, Documenta Ophthalmologica.

[6]  H. Spekreijse,et al.  Standard for visual evoked potentials 1995. The International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision. , 1996, Vision research.

[7]  V. Greenstein,et al.  Visual field defects and multifocal visual evoked potentials: evidence of a linear relationship. , 2002, Archives of ophthalmology.

[8]  H Spekreijse,et al.  The extrastriate generators of the EP to checkerboard onset. A source localization approach. , 1991, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[9]  A M Halliday,et al.  Differences between the occipital distribution of upper and lower field pattern-evoked responses in man. , 1971, Brain research.

[10]  Donald C Hood,et al.  Assessing retinal function with the multifocal technique , 2000, Progress in Retinal and Eye Research.

[11]  S Kangovi,et al.  An interocular comparison of the multifocal VEP: a possible technique for detecting local damage to the optic nerve. , 2000, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[12]  P. Romano Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology. , 2000, Binocular vision & strabismus quarterly.

[13]  S L Graham,et al.  Objective VEP Perimetry in Glaucoma: Asymmetry Analysis to Identify Early Deficits , 2000, Journal of glaucoma.

[14]  W. Mcdonald,et al.  Visual Evoked Response in Diagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis , 1973, British medical journal.

[15]  S. Graham,et al.  Objective perimetry in glaucoma. , 2000, Ophthalmology.

[16]  D. Hood,et al.  Detecting Glaucomatous Damage with Multifocal Visual Evoked Potentials: How Can a Monocular Test Work? , 2003, Journal of glaucoma.

[17]  H. Spekreijse,et al.  Standard for Visual Evoked Potentials 1995 , 1996, Vision Research.

[18]  Erich E. Sutter,et al.  The Fast m-Transform: A Fast Computation of Cross-Correlations with Binary m-Sequences , 1991, SIAM J. Comput..

[19]  D. Hood,et al.  Tracking the recovery of local optic nerve function after optic neuritis: a multifocal VEP study. , 2000, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

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

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

[22]  Donald C Hood,et al.  Conventional pattern-reversal VEPs are not equivalent to summed multifocal VEPs. , 2003, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[23]  W. L. Benedict,et al.  Multiple Sclerosis , 2007, Journal - Michigan State Medical Society.

[24]  Donald C Hood,et al.  Multifocal VEP and ganglion cell damage: applications and limitations for the study of glaucoma , 2003, Progress in Retinal and Eye Research.

[25]  J. W. Howe,et al.  Visual evoked cortical potential to paracentral retinal stimulation in chronic glaucoma, ocular hypertension, and an age-matched group of normals , 1986, Documenta Ophthalmologica.

[26]  Donald C. Hood,et al.  A signal-to-noise analysis of multifocal VEP responses: an objective definition for poor records , 2002, Documenta Ophthalmologica.

[27]  S. Graham,et al.  Multifocal objective perimetry in the detection of glaucomatous field loss. , 2002, American journal of ophthalmology.

[28]  A M Halliday,et al.  Changes in pattern‐evoked responses in man associated with the vertical and horizontal meridians of the visual field , 1970, The Journal of physiology.

[29]  V. Greenstein,et al.  Repeat Reliability of the Multifocal Visual Evoked Potential in Normal and Glaucomatous Eyes , 2002, Journal of glaucoma.