Pupillary response to sparse multifocal stimuli in multiple sclerosis patients

Ali, Eman N.; Maddess, Ted; James, Andrew; Voicu, Cristian; Lueck, Christian J.

doi:10.1177/1352458513512708

Cited by 18 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ali et al 2014(Ali et al, 2014) studied 72 RRMS (mean EDSS score 3.53 ± 1.04 SD) and 13 progressive MS (mean EDSS 5.90 ± 1.43) subjects, and reported better performance of multifocal objective pupil perimetry in detecting abnormal pupillary functions in those with more severe MS: AUC 0.75 for patients with average EDSS score of 3.5, 0.92 for those with EDSS > 5. We previously performed detailed analysis of diagnostic performances of mfVEP (74 RRMS and 50 normal subjects) in detecting ON and established cluster criteria that yielded a 95% specificity and 91% sensitivity (AUC 0.96) (Laron et al, 2009).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multifocal visual evoked potentials and contrast sensitivity correlate with ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer thickness in multiple sclerosis

Narayanan

Cheng

Tang

et al. 2019

Clinical Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To examine the relationship between optical coherence tomography (OCT) macular ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer thickness (GCIPLT), peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer thickness (RNFLT) and visual function in relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Methods: Cirrus OCT, VERIS 60-sector multifocal visual evoked potential (mfVEP) and Pelli-Robson contrast sensitivity (CS) were obtained for 53 eyes with last optic neuritis (ON)>6 months and 105 non-ON eyes in 90 patients. One eye (43 ON, 73 non-ON) was used for correlations when both had the same history. Global (G, 60 sectors) and central 5.6° (C, 24 sectors) mfVEP amplitude and latency were calculated as mean logSNR and median latency. Results: Eyes showing abnormal mfVEP (amplitude or latency) vs OCT (GCIPLT or RNFLT) was 77% vs 69% (p=0.33) in ON, 45% vs 22% (p<0.0005) in non-ON. In ON and non-ON, mfVEP measures and CS correlated with GCIPLT and RNFLT (r=−0.24 to 0.78, p=0.03 to 0.0001). In ON, mfVEP amplitude (C,G) correlated better with GCIPLT (r=0.78, 0.76) than RNFLT (r=0.43, 0.58; p< 0.001, 0.01). Conclusions: MfVEP measures and CS correlated well with GCIPLT and RNFLT in ON and non-ON. MfVEP amplitudes were more highly correlated with GCIPLT than RNFLT in ON. MfVEP detected significantly more defects than OCT in non-ON. Significance: GCIPLT, mfVEP and CS provide useful measures of optic nerve integrity in RRMS.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multifocal visual evoked potentials and contrast sensitivity correlate with ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer thickness in multiple sclerosis

Narayanan

Cheng

Tang

et al. 2019

Clinical Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…ref. 10). The independent stimuli were presented concurrently to each eye on separate LCD monitors on the same nuCoria Field Analyser that was used for mfPOP testing.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since 2009 our group has published several reports using multifocal pupillographic objective perimetry (mfPOP)123456789101112. The method was pioneered by others1314.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing multifocal pupillographic objective perimetry (mfPOP) and multifocal visual evoked potentials (mfVEP) in retinal diseases

Sabeti

James

Carle

et al. 2017

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multifocal pupillographic objective perimetry (mfPOP) shows regions of slight hypersensitivity away from retinal regions damaged by diabetes or age-related macular degeneration (AMD). This study examines if such results also appear in multifocal visual evoked potentials (mfVEPs) recorded on the same day in the same patients. The pupil control system receives input from the extra-striate cortex, so we also examined evidence for such input. We recruited subjects with early type 2 diabetes (T2D) with no retinopathy, and patients with unilateral exudative AMD. Population average responses of the diabetes patients, and the normal fellow eyes of AMD patients, showed multiple regions of significant hypersensitivity (p < 0.05) on both mfPOP and mfVEPs. For mfVEPs the occipital electrodes showed fewer hypersensitive regions than the surrounding electrodes. More advanced AMD showed regions of suppression becoming centrally concentrated in the exudative AMD areas. Thus, mfVEP electrodes biased towards extra-striate cortical responses (surround electrodes) appeared to show similar hypersensitive visual field locations to mfPOP in early stage diabetic and AMD damage. Our findings suggest that hypersensitive regions may be a potential biomarker for future development of AMD or non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy, and may be more informative than visual acuity which remains largely undisturbed during early disease.

show abstract

“…infrequent) and this increases both sensitivity and specificity in discriminating MS patients from controls to the point that they become as high for NoON eyes as for ON eyes as shown in Figure . This finding has subsequently been confirmed using multifocal pupillographic objective perimetry (mfPOP) . In the latter study, we hypothesized a link between abnormal findings in NoON eyes and damage to the optic radiations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 59%

“…A particular advantage of multifocal methods is that, by testing many parts of the visual fields, it becomes possible to measure asymmetries in sensitivity and delay between anatomically equivalent regions of the two eyes. Indeed, testing both eyes simultaneously provides an even more powerful statistical tool for looking at measures of asymmetry, which also provides a sensitive within‐patient control. Another advantage of these techniques is that they are much less costly than MR scanning and so will lend themselves to more frequent testing, thereby lessening the need for – and therefore the cost of – MRI.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple sclerosis seen through new eyes

Maddess

Lueck

2017

Clinical Exper Ophthalmology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pupillary response to sparse multifocal stimuli in multiple sclerosis patients

Abstract: mfPOP is well tolerated and potentially has a role in the diagnosis and assessment of patients with MS.

Cited by 18 publications

References 28 publications

Multifocal visual evoked potentials and contrast sensitivity correlate with ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer thickness in multiple sclerosis

Multifocal visual evoked potentials and contrast sensitivity correlate with ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer thickness in multiple sclerosis

Comparing multifocal pupillographic objective perimetry (mfPOP) and multifocal visual evoked potentials (mfVEP) in retinal diseases

Multiple sclerosis seen through new eyes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About