The effect of binocular summation on time domain transient VEP wave's components

Background : To determine the effect of binocular summation on the time domain transient VEP wave's components. Methods : The monocular and binocular transient visual evoked potentials of 21 normally vision volunteers 18 to 24 years (mean ± SD, 20.7 ± 1.9) during a reversing checkerboard stimulus with spatiotemporal frequency of 2.18-4 cpd-Hz were recorded. The amplitude and latency of N75, P100 and N135 components of monocular and binocular transient visual evoked potentials were measured. To evaluate the binocular summation for binocular records in compare to monocular ones, the average of right and left eyes results obtained and binocular findings were compared with averages of monocular ones using the statistical methods of paired t-test. Results : latencies of N75, P100 and N135 components during binocular stimulation records were significantly shorter compared to monocular ones (p<0.005). The amplitudes of all of three components in binocular stimulation records were higher than monocular records (p<0.05). Conclusion : Regardless of its cause, the higher amplitude and lower latency during binocular stimulation compared to monocular records shows more cortical activity in a faster manner during binocular vision compared to monocular vision.

[1]  Lin-lin Li,et al.  The study of P-VEP on binocular vision in cats , 2013 .

[2]  Maureen G Maguire,et al.  One eye or two: a comparison of binocular and monocular low-contrast acuity testing in multiple sclerosis. , 2011, American journal of ophthalmology.

[3]  Sotiris Plainis,et al.  Binocular summation improves performance to defocus-induced blur. , 2011, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[4]  J. Brabyn,et al.  Monocular vs. Binocular Measurement of Spatial Vision in Elders , 2010, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[5]  Yijun Wang,et al.  VEP-based brain-computer interfaces: time, frequency, and code modulations [Research Frontier] , 2009, IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine.

[6]  De-zheng Wu,et al.  [The study on binocular visual field summation and its possible mechanism]. , 2002, Yan ke xue bao = Eye science.

[7]  V. Porciatti,et al.  Binocular interactions and steady-state VEPs. A study in normal and defective binocular vision (Part II) , 1994, Graefe's Archive for Clinical and Experimental Ophthalmology.

[8]  G. Rogers,et al.  Clinical assessment of visual function in the young child: a prospective study of binocular vision. , 1986, Journal of pediatric ophthalmology and strabismus.

[9]  R. Bolzani,et al.  Binocular visual perception in strabismics studied by means of visual evoked responses , 1984, Documenta Ophthalmologica.

[10]  H. Persson,et al.  VISUAL EVOKED RESPONSES TO PATTERN‐REVERSAL STIMULATION IN CHILDHOOD AMBLYOPIA , 1980, Acta ophthalmologica.

[11]  R Blake,et al.  Reaction time as a measure of binocular interaction in human vision. , 1980, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[12]  E. Campos.  Anomalous retinal correspondence. Monocular and binocular visual evoked responses. , 1980, Archives of ophthalmology.

[13]  R. Srebro.  The visually evoked response. Binocular facilitation and failure when binocular vision is disturbed. , 1978, Archives of ophthalmology.

[14]  M. Gur,et al.  Time Domain Analysis of VEPs Detection of Woveform Abnormolities in Multiple Sclerosis , 2005 .

[15]  L. Bongiovanni,et al.  Mechanism of binocular interaction in refraction errors: study using pattern-reversal visual evoked potentials , 2004, Documenta Ophthalmologica.

[16]  F. Shawkat,et al.  Interocular interaction assessed by VEPs to pattern-onset, -reversal, and -offset in normally sighted and amblyopic subjects. , 1997, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[17]  G. Rogers,et al.  Visual-evoked response binocular summation in normal and strabismic infants. Defining the critical period. , 1991, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[18]  K. Schimrigk,et al.  [Latency differences of visual evoked potentials in binocular and monocular checkerboard stimulation as well as age and sex dependence]. , 1985, EEG-EMG Zeitschrift fur Elektroenzephalographie, Elektromyographie und verwandte Gebiete.

[19]  N. Giuseppe,et al.  Binocular interaction in visual-evoked responses: summation, facilitation and inhibition in a clinical study of binocular vision. , 1983, Ophthalmic research.

[20]  K Nakayama,et al.  Binocularity in the human visual evoked potential: facilitation, summation and suppression. , 1981, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[21]  J Sherman,et al.  Visual evoked potential (VEP): basic concepts and clinical applications. , 1979, Journal of the American Optometric Association.