Top

Acta Neurochirurgica

Published in:

01-01-2012 | Clinical Article

Flash visual evoked potentials are unreliable as markers of ICP due to high variability in normal subjects

Authors: Linnea Andersson, Johanna Sjölund, Josefin Nilsson

Published in: Acta Neurochirurgica | Issue 1/2012

Abstract

Background

Previous publications have suggested a high correlation between flash visual evoked potential (F-VEP) N2 peak latency and intracranial pressure. This would enable F-VEP to be used as a non-invasive and inexpensive method to estimate ICP in a number of settings. However, basic knowledge about variability across subjects and test-retest properties of the F-VEP is lacking.

Methods

Fifteen healthy adult subjects were tested on three different occasions. F-VEP responses were recorded using international standards.

Findings

For the tested population, mean N2 latency was 65.7 ms (SD 10.7 ms) and the range was 48–110 ms. Intra-individual variability was high, in four of the 15 subjects more than 15 ms between testing sessions. The same was found for P2 latency and for N2 and P2 amplitudes. The response waveform was very variable and unambiguous marking of peaks was often diffucult. One out of the 15 subjects had a very poorly developed F-VEP response, but a normal pattern-reversal VEP response.

Conclusions

F-VEP has a wide range of latency, amplitude and waveform across normal subjects. A large proportion of subjects also had a high intra-individual variability over time. This variability makes F-VEPs unreliable as a marker for intracranial pressure, and caution in interpreting F-VEP changes in clinical work is advised.

Carrai R, Grippo A, Lori S, Pinto F, Amantini A (2010) Prognostic value of somatosensory evoked potentials in comatose children: a systematic literature review. Intensive Care Med 36(7):1112–1126PubMedCrossRef

Connolly MB, Jan JE, Cochrane DD (1991) Rapid recovery from cortical visual impairment following correction of prolonged shunt malfunction in congenital hydrocephalus. Arch Neurol 48(9):956–957PubMedCrossRef

Constantini S, Umansky F, Nesher R, Shalit M (1987) Transient blindness following intracranial pressure changes in a hydrocephalic child with a V-P shunt. Childs Nerv Syst 3(6):379–381PubMedCrossRef

Coupland SG, Cochrane DD (1987) Visual evoked potentials, intracranial pressure and ventricular size in hydrocephalus. Doc Ophtalmol 66:321–330CrossRef

Davenport A, Bramley PN (1993) Cerebral function analysing monitor and visual evoked potentials as a noninvasive method of detecting cerebral dysfunction in patients with acute hepatic and renal failure treated with intermittent machine hemofiltration. Ren Fail 15(4):515–522PubMedCrossRef

Desch LW (2001) Longitudinal stability of visual evoked potentials in children and adolescents with hydrocephalus. Dev Med Child Neurol 43:113–117PubMedCrossRef

Gumerlock MK, York D, Durkis D (1994) Visual evoked responses as a monitor of itracranial pressure during hyperosmolar blood-brain barrier disruption. Acta Neurochir Suppl (Wein) 60:132–135

Liasis A, Thompson DA, Hayward R, Nischal KK (2003) Sustained raised intracranial pressure implicated only by pattern reversal visual evoked potentials after cranial vault expansion surgery. Pediatr Neurosurg 39:75–80PubMedCrossRef

Lin JS, Liu JHK (2010) Circadian variations in intracranial pressure and translaminar pressure difference in Sprague-Dawley Rats. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 51(11):5739–5743PubMedCrossRef

10.

Nilsson J (2006) Intraindividual variability of flash-VEP latency over time in normal subjects. Clin Neurophys 117(Suppl 1):166CrossRef

11.

Odom JV, Bach M, Brigell M, Holder GE, McCulloch DL, Tormene AP, Vaegan (2010) ISCEV standard for clinical visual evoked potentials (2009 update). Doc Ophthalmol 120:111–119PubMedCrossRef

12.

Rizzo PA, Pierelli F, Pozzessere G, Sancesario G, Boatta M, Santarcangelo G (1984) Pattern visual evoked potentials in pseudotumor cerebri. Acta Neurol 84:57–63

13.

Rothstein TL (2000) The role of evoked potentials in anoxic-ischemic coma and severe brain trauma. J Clin Neurophysiol 17(5):486–497PubMedCrossRef

14.

Sarnthein J, Andersson M, Zimmermann MB, Zumsteg D (2009) High test-retest reliability of checkerboard reversal visual evoked potentials (VEP) over 8 months. Clin Neurophys 120:1835–1840CrossRef

15.

Soelberg Sörensen P, Trojaborg W, Gjerris F, Krogsaa B (1985) Visual evoked potentials in pseudotumor cerebri. Arch Neurol 42:150–153CrossRef

16.

Sjöström A, Uvebrant P, Roos A (1995) The light-flash-evoked response as a possible indicator of increased intracranial pressure in hydrocephalus. Childs Nerv Syst 11(7):381–387, discussion 387PubMedCrossRef

17.

Stolz G, Aschoff JC, Born J, Aschoff J (1988) VEP, physiological and psychological circadian variations in humans. J Neurol 235(5):308–313PubMedCrossRef

18.

York D, Pulliam MW, Rosenfeld JG, Watts C (1981) Relationship between visual evoked potentials and intracranial pressure. J Neurosurg 55:909–916PubMedCrossRef

19.

Wohns RN, Colpitts M, Colpitts Y, Clement T, Blackett WB (1987) Effect of high altitude on the visual evoked responses in humans on Mt. Everest Neurosurgery 21(3):352–356CrossRef

20.

York D, Legan M, Benner S, Watts C (1984) Further studies with a noninvasive method of intracranial pressure estimation. Neurosurgery 14(4):456–461PubMedCrossRef

21.

Young RS, Kimura E (2010) Statistical test of VEP waveform equality. Doc Ophthalmol 120(2):121–135PubMedCrossRef

22.

Zhao YL, Zhou JY, Zhu GH (2005) Clinical experience with the noninvasive ICP monitoring system. Acta Neurochir (Wein) 95:351–355CrossRef

Title: Flash visual evoked potentials are unreliable as markers of ICP due to high variability in normal subjects
Authors: Linnea Andersson
Johanna Sjölund
Josefin Nilsson
Publication date: 01-01-2012
Publisher: Springer Vienna
Published in: Acta Neurochirurgica / Issue 1/2012
Print ISSN: 0001-6268
Electronic ISSN: 0942-0940
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-011-1152-9

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Flash visual evoked potentials are unreliable as markers of ICP due to high variability in normal subjects

Abstract

Background

Methods

Findings

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Findings

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2012

Jeremy C. Ganz: Gamma Knife Neurosurgery

A. R. Vaccaro, J. C. Eck (eds): Controversies in spine surgery: best evidence recommendations

Intentional partial coiling dome protection of complex ruptured cerebral aneurysms prevents acute rebleeding and produces favorable clinical outcomes

Accuracy of external ventricular drainage catheter placement

Traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage, basal ganglia hematoma and ischemic stroke caused by a torn lenticulostriate artery

Three years of neurosurgical experience in a multinational field hospital in northern Afghanistan