Comparison of isolated-check visual evoked potential and standard automated perimetry in early glaucoma and high-risk...

To compare the diagnostic performance of isolated-check visual evoked potential (icVEP) and standard automated perimetry (SAP), for evaluating the application values of icVEP in the detection of early glaucoma.

Totally 144 subjects (288 eyes) were enrolled in this study. icVEP testing was performed with the Neucodia visual electrophysiological diagnostic system. A 15% positive-contrast (bright) condition pattern was used in this device to differentiate between glaucoma patients and healthy control subjects. Signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) were derived based on a multivariate statistic. The eyes were judged as abnormal if the test yielded an SNR≤1. SAP testing was performed with the Humphrey Field Analyzer II. The visual fields were deemed as abnormality if the glaucoma hemifield test results outside normal limits; or the pattern standard deviation with P<0.05; or the cluster of three or more non-edge points on the pattern deviation plot in a single hemifield with P<0.05, one of which must have a P<0.01. Disc photographs were graded as either glaucomatous optic neuropathy or normal by two experts who were masked to all other patient information. Moorfields regression analysis (MRA) used as a separate diagnostic classification was performed by Heidelberg retina tomograph (HRT).

When the disc photograph grader was used as diagnostic standard, the sensitivity for SAP and icVEP was 32.3% and 38.5% respectively and specificity was 82.3% and 77.8% respectively. When the MRA Classifier was used as the diagnostic standard, the sensitivity for SAP and icVEP was 48.6% and 51.4% respectively and specificity was 84.1% and 78.0% respectively. When the combined structural assessment was used as the diagnostic standard, the sensitivity for SAP and icVEP was 59.2% and 53.1% respectively and specificity was 84.2% and 84.6% respectivlely. There was no statistical significance between the sensitivity or specificity of SAP and icVEP, regardless of which diagnostic standard was based on.

The diagnostic performance of icVEP is not better than that of SAP in the detection of early glaucoma.