Comparison of psychophysical and evoked potential methods in the detection of visual deficits in multiple sclerosis.

We compared the diagnostic sensitivity of traditional visual tests such as the Snellen-test and pattern reversal VEPs with psychophysical and electrophysiological tests involving motion processing and psychophysical tests of contrast processing in detecting visual deficits in a group of MS patients. A total of 30 patients with a definite diagnosis of MS and 22 age-matched controls selected from a pool of healthy volunteers participated in this study. Visual evoked potentials elicited by reversing checkerboards and moving random dot patterns (motion-onset VEPs) were recorded. The recognition of motion-defined forms (motion-defined letter test, MDL-test) and of contrast reduced optotypes was measured psychophysically. Of 30 patients, 29 showed deficits in at least one of the tests applied. The highest detection rate was obtained for a simple psychophysical test, the MDL-test, which revealed abnormalities in 80% of the patients. This is about 12% more than pattern VEPs could detect. Conversely, abnormalities in motion-onset VEPs were found in only 16% of the patients. Our results show that by adding a simple psychophysical test of form-from-motion analysis our capability to demonstrate an involvement of the visual system in MS patients may be promoted considerably.

[1]  M Kuba,et al.  Motion-reversal visual evoked responses. , 1992, Physiological research.

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

[3]  H. Spekreijse,et al.  Flicker and movement constituents of the pattern reversal response , 1985, Vision Research.

[4]  R. M. Siegel,et al.  The Perception of Structure from Visual Motion in Monkey and Man , 1990, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[5]  Visuell evozierte Potentiale bei Musterbewegung , 1983 .

[6]  D. Regan,et al.  Recognition of motion-defined shapes in patients with multiple sclerosis and optic neuritis. , 1991, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[7]  D Regan,et al.  Visual Acuity for Optotypes Made Visible by Relative Motion , 1990, Optometry and vision science : official publication of the American Academy of Optometry.

[8]  Allan H. Ropper,et al.  Evoked potentials in clinical medicine (second of two parts). , 1982 .

[9]  O. Parsons,et al.  Flicker fusion thresholds in multiple sclerosis. , 1957, A.M.A. archives of neurology and psychiatry.

[10]  Michael Bach,et al.  Motion adaptation governs the shape of motion-evoked cortical potentials , 1994, Vision Research.

[11]  E. Wist,et al.  The Pulfrich spatial frequency phenomenon: a psychophysical method competitive to visual evoked potentials in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. , 1978, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[12]  John H. R. Maunsell,et al.  Visual processing in monkey extrastriate cortex. , 1987, Annual review of neuroscience.

[13]  D. Regan,et al.  Pattern visual evoked potentials and spatial vision in retrobulbar neuritis and multiple sclerosis. , 1984, Archives of neurology.

[14]  B W van Dijk,et al.  Motion-onset visual-evoked potentials as a function of retinal eccentricity in man. , 1993, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[15]  D. Rushton,et al.  Use of the Pulfrich pendulum for detecting abnormal delay in the visual pathway in multiple sclerosis. , 1975, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[16]  D. Silberberg,et al.  New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: Guidelines for research protocols , 1983, Annals of neurology.

[17]  J. Kelsey,et al.  Visual Evoked Potentials in Man: New Developments , 1978 .

[18]  I. Murray,et al.  The visual defect in multiple sclerosis and optic neuritis. A combined psychophysical and electrophysiological investigation. , 1991, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[19]  R. Willison,et al.  FLICKER FUSION IN MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS , 1961, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[20]  R. Müller,et al.  The influence of grating contrast on the human cortical potential visually evoked by motion. , 1988, Acta neurobiologiae experimentalis.

[21]  D Regan,et al.  Delayed visual perception and delayed visual evoked potentials in the spinal form of multiple sclerosis and in retrobulbar neuritis. , 1976, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[22]  D Regan,et al.  Visual acuity and contrast sensitivity in multiple sclerosis--hidden visual loss: an auxiliary diagnostic test. , 1977, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[23]  J. Kulikowski,et al.  Pattern and movement detection in man and rabbit: Separation and comparison of occipital potentials , 1978, Vision Research.

[24]  P Thompson,et al.  Spatiotemporal contrast sensitivity and colour vision in multiple sclerosis. , 1989, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[25]  T. Hoeppner,et al.  Visual evoked responses and visual symptoms in multiple sclerosis , 1978, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[26]  D. Regan,et al.  Motion‐defined letter detection and recognition in patients with multiple sclerosis , 1992, Annals of neurology.

[27]  D. Regan,et al.  Visual processing of motion-defined form: selective failure in patients with parietotemporal lesions , 1992, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.