May 2003
Volume 44, Issue 13
Free
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   May 2003
Visual Impairment Following Shaking/Impact Injury in Infancy: A Clinical and Electrophysiological Study
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • R. Brennan
    Department of Ophthalmology, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
  • M.P. Clarke
    Department of Ophthalmology, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
  • A. Redfearn
    Department of Child Health, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
  • M. Gibson
    Department of Child Health, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
  • C. Lazaro
    Department of Child Health, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
  • K.W. Mitchell
    Department of Medical Physics, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships  R. Brennan, None; M.P. Clarke, None; A. Redfearn, None; M. Gibson, None; C. Lazaro, None; K.W. Mitchell, None.
  • Footnotes
    Support  none
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science May 2003, Vol.44, 2717. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      R. Brennan, M.P. Clarke, A. Redfearn, M. Gibson, C. Lazaro, K.W. Mitchell; Visual Impairment Following Shaking/Impact Injury in Infancy: A Clinical and Electrophysiological Study . Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2003;44(13):2717.

      Download citation file:


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

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Abstract: : Purpose: To evaluate the binocular flash visual evoked potential (VEP) as a tool for the assessment of infants with shaken baby syndrome (SBS) and to relate the findings to fundus appearance, intracranial pathology and visual impairment. Methods: Cases admitted with suspected SBS and referred to the ophthalmology service were studied. All had dilated indirect ophthalmoscopy performed. As soon as the childs condition permitted, binocular flash VEPs were elicited using a Ganzfeld Bowl stimulator, the strength of a stimulus being 1 Standard Flash and proportionate background illumination (ISCEV 94). The stimulus repetition rate was set to 1 per second. At least two averages were obtained to check for consistency, and quantitative analysis was performed on the average of these two. Latency of the most consistent positive component of the VEPs elicited, i.e. component PIV was measured and compared to age matched controls. Those with abnormal flash VEPs had a follow up VEP performed. Results: 10 cases with a final diagnosis of SBS were included in the study. 9/10 had abnormal VEPs at presentation, including 5 with absent retinal haemorrhages. 6/8 who had initially abnormal VEPs had normal VEPs at follow up (3 – 22 months following admission.) The 2 remaining abnormal VEPs showed significant improvement. One child failed to attend for a follow up VEP and the child whose VEP was initially normal did not have the test repeated. At final follow up (range 2 1/2 – 50 months) 5 had decreased visual acuity including the child with the initially normal VEP. 8/10 had subdural haematomas. The two with normal neuroimaging were scanned 5 months and 21 months later than the time of suspected injury Conclusion: The flash VEP can be a marker for optic nerve, visual pathway and visual cortex damage in SBS and may provide additional information to fundoscopy.

Keywords: electrophysiology: clinical • trauma 
×
×

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.

×