The mfVEP recordings were obtained using VERIS software 5.9 (Electro-Diagnostic Imaging, San Mateo, CA, USA). The stimulus was a scaled dartboard with a diameter of 44.5°, containing 60 sectors, each with 16 alternating checks, 8 white (luminance: 200 cd/m
2) and 8 black (luminance: <3 cd/m
2), with a Michelson contrast of approximately 99%. The sectors were cortically scaled with eccentricity to stimulate approximately equal areas of the visual cortex.
17 The dartboard pattern reversed according to a pseudorandom m-sequence at a frame rate of 75.
18
Three channels of continuous VEP recordings were obtained with gold cup electrodes. For the midline channel, the electrodes were placed 4 cm above the inion (active), at the inion (reference), and on the forehead (ground). For the other two channels, the same ground and reference electrodes were used, but the active electrodes were placed 1 cm above and 4 cm lateral to the inion on either side. By taking the difference between pairs of channels, three additional “derived” channels were obtained. The records were amplified with the high- and low-frequency cutoffs set at 3 and 100 Hz, respectively (half-amplitude preamplifier P511J; Grass Instruments, Rockland, MA, USA), and sampled at 1200 Hz (every 0.83 ms). The impedance was less than 5 K for all subjects. In a single session, two 7-minute recordings were obtained from monocular stimulation of each eye and were averaged for analysis. Second-order kernel best-channel responses were then extracted.
19,20 This averaging, as well as all other analyses, was computed with custom-made programs written in commercial software (Matlab; Mathworks, Inc., Natick, MA, USA).
21 Response amplitudes were calculated by obtaining the root mean square (RMS) of the amplitude for each mfVEP response over time intervals from 45 to 150 ms. Signal-to-noise ratios were calculated for each response by dividing the RMS of the signal window by the average of the 60 RMS values of the noise-only window. Each of these values was compared with values from the normative group subjects
22 and monocular probability plots were derived. Interocular amplitude differences for each patient were also calculated by taking the logarithm of the interocular ratio at each location
21 and the interocular probability plot was derived. The amplitude probability plot was color-coded with saturated red squares (left eye) and saturated blue squares (right eye), with a significant difference being determined at
P < 0.01 and, for desaturated colors, at
P < 0.05.
Monocular and interocular latencies were measured as the temporal shift producing the best cross-correlation value between the corresponding responses of the patient's eye and a template based on control eyes (monocular analysis) or between the corresponding responses from two eyes (interocular analysis). The latency probability plots were color-coded in a manner similar to the amplitude plots using ovals instead of squares.
To evaluate the mfVEP and HVF total deviation results, we analyzed cluster defects: a defective cluster had two or more contiguous points at
P < 0.01, or three or more contiguous points at
P < 0.05, with at least one point at
P < 0.01.
23