April 2010
Volume 51, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   April 2010
Color Vision Testing versus Pattern Visual Evoked Potentials in Multiple Sclerosis
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • F. C. Gundogan
    Ophthalmology,
    Gulhane Military Medical Academy, Ankara, Turkey
  • O. Oz
    Neurology,
    Gulhane Military Medical Academy, Ankara, Turkey
  • S. Demirkaya
    Neurology,
    Gulhane Military Medical Academy, Ankara, Turkey
  • G. Sobaci
    Ophthalmology,
    Gulhane Military Medical Academy, Ankara, Turkey
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  F.C. Gundogan, None; O. Oz, None; S. Demirkaya, None; G. Sobaci, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  None.
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science April 2010, Vol.51, 5471. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      F. C. Gundogan, O. Oz, S. Demirkaya, G. Sobaci; Color Vision Testing versus Pattern Visual Evoked Potentials in Multiple Sclerosis. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2010;51(13):5471.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract
 
Purpose:
 

To compare the sensitivities of color vision testing and pattern visual evoked potentials (PVEP) in the diagnosis of optic pathway involvement in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients without a history of visual symptoms.

 
Methods:
 

The right eyes of 20 MS patients and 20 control subjects were included. Color vision was evaluated by Farnsworth-Munsell (FM) 100 Hue test. Total error scores (TES) in FM-100 Hue test were assessed. PVEP recordings were peformed by Roland-Consult Retiscan system. A checkerboard pattern with 1 degree check size was used. The contrast between black and white squares was 99%.

 
Results:
 

The normative data for FM-100 Hue test and PVEP test were assessed by 95% confidence interval for P100 latency and TES in FM-100 Hue test in the control subjects. Five percent confidence interval level were used as normative data for P100 amplitude. With respect to the normative datas, 14 MS patients (70%) had increased TES in FM-100 Hue test, 11 (55%) had delayed P100 latency. Nine MS patients (45%) had decreased P100 amplitude. Areas under the ROC curve were 0.944 for FM-100 Hue test, 0.753 for P100 latency and 0.173 for P100 amplitude (Figure 1).

 
Conclusions:
 

FM 100 Hue color vision testing is superior to PVEP in detecting visual pathway involvement in MS.  

 
Keywords: neuro-ophthalmology: diagnosis • color vision • electrophysiology: clinical 
×
×

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.

×