June 2017
Volume 58, Issue 8
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2017
Handheld VEP in elderly and/or non-verbal, non-mobile Glaucoma Patients
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • ivy S kim
    Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, United States
  • Gloria Wu
    Ophthalmology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States
  • Mary Gao
    Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, United States
  • Bonnibel Bautista
    Psychology, Saint Louis Universtiy, Baguio, Benguet, Philippines
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   ivy kim, None; Gloria Wu, None; Mary Gao, None; Bonnibel Bautista, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  none
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science June 2017, Vol.58, 4683. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to Subscribers Only
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      ivy S kim, Gloria Wu, Mary Gao, Bonnibel Bautista; Handheld VEP in elderly and/or non-verbal, non-mobile Glaucoma Patients. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2017;58(8):4683.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : Visually Evoked Potential (VEP) has been shown to be helpful in examining the integrity of the visual pathways in nonverbal children and adults. The use of a portable, handheld VEP in the setting of elderly, non-mobile and/or non-verbal glaucoma patients has not been well studied.
Purpose: To evaluate VEPs using the RETeval device in elderly, non-mobile, and/or non-verbal glaucoma patients in a clinical setting.

Methods : RETeval (LKC Technologies, Gaithersburg, MD) was used. The RETeval device served as the ganzfeld; flash VEP was performed on patients, using ISCEV1 guidelines of electrode placement. The RETeval flash VEP followed ISCEV1 protocol for flash VEP, 3 cd.s.m-2. All patients were dilated to 6mm. VEPs were performed in 2016. Inclusion criteria: vision 20/20 to 20/60, glaucoma patients diagnosed by previous eye MD or optometrist, previous VF documenting glaucoma. Inability to sit for visual field, inability to operate hand held remote control for automated visual field testing, inability to speak or communicate with staff. Exclusion criteria: macular laser or previous optic neuritis history.
Control patients: no glaucoma, no optic nerve disease, visual acuity 20/20-20/60. Measurements of P2, N2 performed manually (IK and verified by GW).

Results : 8 Glaucoma patients: 5 females, 3 males, avg age=74.7 yrs (sd=12.5, range=59-94 yrs).
8 Controls : 3 females, 5 males, avg age=66.0 yrs (sd=14.9, range=43-83 yrs).
P2 amp: (Glc) P2 (avg OD and OS)=27.5 uV, sd=11.0, range=18-48 uV; Controls P2 (avg OD and OS)=14.7 uV,( sd=9.7, range=4.75-33.5)
unpaired t-test: p=0.028
P2 Implicit time (P2IT): Glc v C, t-test not significant.

Conclusions : This small study shows that there may be clinical usefulness in the handheld flash VEP in the setting of poorly mobile, elderly and/or non-verbal patients with glaucoma. This handheld VEP holds promise in the follow up of our most vulnerable patients who need eye care.

1 Odom JV, Bach M, Brigell M et al. ISCEV Standard for Clinical Visual Evoked Potentials (2016 update). Doc Ophthalmol 2016; 133:1-9.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2017 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Baltimore, MD, May 7-11, 2017.

 

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×