Fullfield and extrafoveal visual evoked potentials in healthy eyes: reference data for a curved OLED display

• Published in: Documenta ophthalmologica 2022-12, Vol.145 (3), p.247-262
• Main Authors: Baumgarten, Sabine, Hoberg, Tabea, Lohmann, Tibor, Mazinani, Babac, Walter, Peter, Koutsonas, Antonis
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Age; Aged; Cross-Sectional Studies; Electrophysiology; Electroretinography; Evoked Potentials, Visual; Eye; Female; Humans; Laboratories; Latency; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Neurological diseases; Ophthalmology; Optic nerve; Original; Original Research Article; Prospective Studies; Visual evoked potentials
• ISSN: 0012-4486; 1573-2622
• DOI: 10.1007/s10633-022-09897-5

Purpose Visual evoked potentials (VEP) present an important diagnostic tool in various ophthalmologic and neurologic diseases. Quantitative response data varied among patients but are also dependent on the recording and stimulating equipment. We established VEP reference values for our setting which was recently modified by using a curved OLED display as visual stimulator. Distinction is made between fullfield (FF) and extrafoveal (EF) conduction, and the effect of sex, age and lens status was determined. Methods This prospective cross-sectional study included 162 healthy eyes of 162 test persons older than 10 years. A fullfield pattern-reversal visual evoked potential (FF-PR-VEP) with two stimulus sizes (ss) (20.4′ and 1.4°) as well as an extrafoveal pattern onset–offset VEP (EF-P-ON/OFF-VEP) (ss 1.4° and 2.8°) was derived in accordance with the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision guidelines. Amplitudes and latencies were recorded, and the mean values as well as standard deviations were calculated. Age- and sex-dependent influences and the difference between phakic and pseudophakic eyes were examined. A subanalysis of EF-P-ON/OFF-VEP and fullfield pattern onset–offset VEP (FF-P-ON/OFF-VEP) was performed. A 55-inch curved OLED display (LG55EC930V, LG Electronics Inc., Seoul, South Korea) was used as visual stimulator. Results Mean P100 latency of the FF-PR-VEP was 103.81 ± 7.77 ms (ss 20.4′) and 102.58 ± 7.26 ms (ss 1.4°), and mean C2 latency of the EF-P-ON/OFF-VEP was 102.95 ± 11.84 ms (ss 1.4°) and 113.58 ± 9.87 ms (ss 2.8°). For all stimulation settings (FF-PR-VEP, EF-P-ON/OFF-VEP), a significant effect of age with longer latencies and smaller amplitudes in older subjects and higher amplitudes in women was observed. We saw no significant difference in latency or amplitude between phakic and pseudophakic eyes and between EF-P-ON/OFF-VEP and FF-P-ON/OFF-VEP. Conclusions A curved OLED visual stimulator is well suited to obtain VEP response curves with a reasonable interindividual variability. We found significant effects of age and gender in our responses but no effect of the lens status. EF-P-ON/OFF-VEP tends to show smaller amplitudes.