Field specific visual evoked potentials for assessment of peripheral field defect in a paediatric population

What can visual electrophysiology tell about possible visual-field defects in paediatric patients

Recognising a potential visual-field (VF) defect in paediatric patients might be challenging, especially in children before the age of 5 years and those with developmental delay or intellectual disability. Visual electrophysiological testing is an objective and non-invasive technique for evaluation of visual function in paediatric patients, which can characterise the location of dysfunction and differentiate between disorders of the retina, optic nerve and visual pathway. The recording of electroretinography (ERG) and visual-evoked potentials (VEP) is possible from early days of life and requires no subjective input from the patient. As the origins of ERG and VEP tests are known, the pattern of electrophysiological changes can provide information about the VF of a child unable to perform accurate perimetry. This review summarises previously published electrophysiological findings in several common types of VF defects that can be found in paediatric patients (generalised VF defect, peripheral VF loss, central scotoma, bi-temporal hemianopia, altitudinal VF defect, quadrantanopia and homonymous hemianopia). It also shares experience on using electrophysiological testing as additional functional evidence to other tests in the clinical challenge of diagnosing or excluding VF defects in complex paediatric patients. Each type of VF defect is illustrated with one or two clinical cases.

Electrophysiological Evidences of Visual Field Alterations in Children Exposed to Vigabatrin Early in Life

BACKGROUND

We assessed central and peripheral visual field processing in children with epilepsy who were exposed to vigabatrin during infancy.

METHODS

Steady-state visual evoked potentials and pattern electroretinograms to field-specific radial checkerboards flickering at two cycle frequencies (7.5 and 6 Hz for central and peripheral stimulations, respectively) were recorded from Oz and at the eye in seven school-age children (10.1 ± 3.5 years) exposed to vigabatrin early in life, compared with children early exposed to other antiepileptic drugs (n = 9) and healthy children (n = 8). The stimulation was made of two concentric circles (0 to 5 and 30 to 60 degrees of angle) and presented at four contrast levels (96%, 64%, 32%, and 16%).

RESULTS

Ocular responses were similar in all groups for central but not for the peripheral stimulations, which were significantly lower in the vigabatrin-exposed group at high contrast level. This peripheral retinal response was negatively correlated to vigabatrin exposure duration. Cortical responses to central stimulations, including contrast response functions in the children with epilepsy in both groups, were lower than those in normally developing children.

CONCLUSIONS

Alteration of ocular processing was found only in the vigabatrin-exposed children. Central cortical processing, however, was impaired in both epileptic groups, with more pronounced effects in vigabatrin-exposed children. Our study suggests that asymptomatic long-term visual toxicity may still be present at school age, even several years after discontinuation of drug therapy.

A frequency-tagging electrophysiological method to identify central and peripheral visual field deficits

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to develop a fast and efficient electrophysiological protocol to examine the visual field's integrity, which would be useful in pediatric testing.

METHODS

Steady-state visual-evoked potentials (ssVEPs) to field-specific radial checkerboards flickering at two cycle frequencies (7.5 and 6 Hz for central and peripheral stimulations, respectively) recorded at Oz were collected from 22 participants from 5 to 34 years old and from 5 visually impaired adolescents (12-16 years old). Responses from additional leads (POz, O1, O2), and the impact of gaze deviation on the signals, were also investigated in a subgroup of participants.

RESULTS

Steady-state visual-evoked potentials responses were similar at all electrode sites, although the signal from the central stimulation was significantly higher at Oz and was highly sensitive in detecting gaze deviation. No effect of age or sex was found, indicating similar ssVEP responses between adults and healthy children. Visual acuity was related to the central signal when comparing healthy participants with four central visual impaired adolescents. Clinical validation of our electrophysiological protocol was also achieved in a 15-year-old adolescent with a severe peripheral visual deficit, as assessed with Goldmann perimetry.

CONCLUSIONS

A single electrode over Oz is sufficient to gather both central and peripheral visual signals and also to control for gaze deviation. Our method presents several advantages in evaluating visual fields integrity, as it is fast, reliable, and efficient, and applicable in children as young as 5 years old. However, a larger sample of healthy children should be tested to establish clinical norms.

Effect of different stimulus configurations on the visual evoked potential (VEP)

The purpose of this study was to assess changes in the response profile of the pattern visual evoked potential (VEP) using three stimulus configurations simulating visual-field scotomas: central circular and central blank fields increasing incrementally in diameter from 1° to 15°, hemi-field, and quadrant patterns. Five visually normal adult subjects (ages 22-68 years) were tested binocularly at 1 m for each stimulus configuration on 5 separate days. A checkerboard test pattern (64 × 64 black-and-white checks, 85% contrast, 64 cd/m(2) luminance, 20 s of stimulus duration, 2-Hz temporal frequency) was used. The group mean VEP amplitude increased in a linear manner with increase in the central circular diameter (y = 0.805x + 2.00; r = 0.986) and decrease in central blank field diameter (y = -0.769x + 16.22; r = 0.987). There was no significant change in latency in nearly all cases. The group mean coefficient of variability results indicated that the VEP amplitude was repeatable for the different stimulus configurations. The finding of VEP response linearity for the circular stimulus fields, and repeatability for all stimulus configurations, suggests that the clinician may be able to use the VEP technique with the suggested test patterns as a rapid and simple tool for objective assessment for several types of visual-field defects for a range of abnormal visual conditions and special populations.

Field-specific visual-evoked potentials: identifying field defects in vigabatrin-treated children

OBJECTIVE

To derive a visual-evoked potential (VEP) technique for identifying visual field defects in children with epilepsy treated with vigabatrin and unable to perform perimetry.

BACKGROUND

Studies have linked vigabatrin to a specific pattern of visual field loss. Few studies have included the pediatric population because of difficulties in assessing the visual field by perimetry below a developmental age of 9 years.

METHODS

A field-specific VEP was developed with a central (0 degrees to 5 degrees radius) and peripheral stimulus (30 degrees to 60 degrees radius). Stimuli consisted of black and white checks that increased in size with eccentricity. Checks reversed at different rates, allowing separate central and peripheral responses to be recorded. Five vigabatrin-treated young adults with field defects were identified using this stimulus. Electroretinograms (ERG) were recorded to examine the effects of vigabatrin on retinal function. Thirty-nine children aged 3 to 15 years were included in the study. Twelve patients were examined by both the field-specific stimulus test and perimetry. The diagnostic performance of the field-specific stimulus test was compared with that of perimetry.

RESULTS

Thirty-five of 39 children complied with the field-specific stimulus, 26 of 39 complied with the ERG, and 12 of 39 complied with perimetry. Using the summed amplitude of the peripheral response from O(2) and O(1), responses below 10 microV were deemed abnormal. The field-specific stimulus identified 3 of 4 abnormal perimetry results and 7 of 8 normal perimetry results, giving a sensitivity of 75% and a specificity of 87.5%. When comparing perimetry results with the ERG parameters, only the 30-Hz flicker amplitude, with a cutoff below 70 microV, gave a useful indication of visual field loss.

CONCLUSION

Field-specific VEP are well tolerated by children older than 2 years of age and are sensitive and specific in identifying vigabatrin-associated peripheral field defects.