Elaboration of Normative Values of Visual Evoked Potentials in the Neurophysiological Exploration Laboratory of the Neurology Department at Fann Teaching Hospital in 2020
Nagasaki Saurel Ralmach1, Seck Lala Bouna1, Dinga Boudzoumba Stane Steeven1, Mualaba Célèbre2*, Mpung Mansoy Halladain1, Katende Mbuyi Thierry1, Ndiaye Moustapha1 and Diop Amadou Gallo1
1Neurology Department at Fann Teaching Hospital, Senegal
2Neurosurgery Department at Fann Teaching Hospital, Senegal
*Corresponding Author: Mualaba Célèbre, Neurosurgery Department at Fann Teaching Hospital, Senegal.
July 30, 2021; Published: November 29, 2021
Introduction: Visual evoked potential (VEP) is the electrical response of the occipital cortex that is elicited by visual stimulation. They study macular and perimacular functioning as well as the conduction of visual pathways. They therefore contribute to the diagnosis of several diseases of the central nervous system such as Devic’s optic neuromyelitis and multiple sclerosis. Their standards vary from one laboratory to another due to the difference in conditions and stimulation materials. The objective of this study is to present the results of our laboratory comparative to others laboratories.
Materials and Methods: This was a prospective cross-sectional study that consisted in realizing the VEP of checkerboard at 60 minutes of arc in 50 people in apparent good health and free from eye disorders distributed equally between men and women and in the age group under 40 and 40 and over.
Results: P100 latency was 97.86 ± 4.37 msec in the right eye versus 97.92 ± 4.10 msec in the left eye in men and 94.63 ± 5.08 msec in the right eye versus 94.88 ± 4.87 msec in the left eye in women. Overall, it was 96.25 ± 4.97 msec in the right eye compared to 96.40 ± 4.71 msec in the left eye. The amplitude of P100 was 6.61 ± 3.28 μV on the right and 6.51 ± 3.10 μV overall. The amplitudes were greater and the latencies shorter in women.
VEP vary significantly depending on gender, height and weight. But there was no significant change in age and body mass index.
Conclusion: The normative values of the VEP in our study were close to those found in the literature. They vary with respect to sex and anthropometric parameters.
Keywords: Normative Values; VEP; Senegal
- Odom J Vernon., et al. “International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision. ISCEV standard for clinical visual evoked potentials”. Documenta Ophthalmologica 133 (2016): 1-9.
- Adrian ED and Matthews BH. “The interpretation of potential waves in the cortex”. The Journal of Physiology 81 (1934): 440-471.
- Rigaudière Florence. "V-5: cortical visual evoked potentials (PEV)”. Eye and physiology of vision V-Electrophysiological signals (2013).
- Monireh Mahjoob., et al. “Normative values of visual evoked potentials in Northeastern of Iran”. Journal of Optometry 12 (2019) 192-197.
- Odom JV., et al. “ISCEV standard for clinical visual evoked potentials”. Documenta Ophthalmology 120 (2010): 205-214.
- Carter JL. In: Clinical Neurophysiology. Edition. Daube JR and Rubin DI. 3rd edition. Oxford University Press. Visual Evoked Potentials (2009): 311-322.
- McCulloch DL and Skarf B. “Development of the human visual sysstem: monocular and binocular pattern VEP latency”. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science 32 (1991): 2372-2381.
- Sharma Ruby., et al. “Visual Evoked Potentials: Normative Values and Gender Differences”. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research7 (2015): CC12-CC15.
- Patricia de Freitas Dotto., et al. “Gender-based normative values for pattern-reversal and flash visually evoked potentials under binocular and monocular stimulation in healthy adults”. Documenta Ophthalmologica1 (2017): 53-67.
- Bugeme M., et al. “Visual evoked potentials: Normative values from healthy Senegalese adults”. Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Disorders 4 (2020): 049-052.
- El Machkourmerieme. “Establishment and development of normal values of visual evoked potentials in the clinical neurophysiology laboratory of the chu Hassan ii neurology service in fez”. Thesis for obtaining the DES neurology (2011).
- Shibasaki H and Kuroiwa Y. “Pattern reversal visual evoked potentials in Japanese patients with multiple sclerosis”. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry12 (1982): 1139-1143.
- Tandon OP and Sharma KN. “Visual evoked potential in young adults: a normative study”. The Indian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology4 (1989): 247-249.
- Celesia GG., et al. “Effects of age and sex on pattern electroretinograms and visual evoked potentials”. National Library of Medicine3 (1987): 161-171.
- Kjaer M. “Visual evoked potentials in normal subjects and patients with multiple sclerosis”. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica 1 (1980): 1-13.
- Dion LA., et al. “Sex differences in visual evoked potentials in school-age children: What is the evidence beyond the checkerboard?” International Journal of Psychophysiology2 (2013): 136-142.
- Marsh MS and Smith S. “Differences in the pattern visual evoked potential between pregnant and non-pregnant women”. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 92 (2014): 102-106.
- Kaneda Y., et al. “Sex differences in visual evoked potential and electroencephalogram of healthy adults”. The Tokushima Journal of Experimental Medicine3-4 (1996): 143-157.
- Rajpoot RS., et al. “Effect of Hormone Repalcement Therapy on Visual Evoked Potentials in Post-Menopausal Females”. International Journal of Medical Research Professionals3 (2015): 24-28.
- Mitchell KW., et al. “Visual evoked potentials in the older population: age and gender effects”. Clinical Physics and Physiological Measurement4 (1987): 317-324.
- Tandon OP and Ram D. “Visual evoked responses to pattern reversal in children”. The Indian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology3 (1991): 175-179.