Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 18, 2025
Dynamic Visual Tests to Identify and Quantify Visual Damage and Repair Following Demyelination in Optic Neuritis Patients
Published on: April 14, 2014
Correlation of Pattern Reversal and Flash Visual Evoked Potential Latencies With Optical Coherence Tomography
Hussein Moussa1, Raja A Sawaya, Rudy Deeb
1Department of Neurology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon.
Purpose:
The object of the study is to relate the pattern reversal visual evoked potential (PRVEP) and flash VEP (f-VEP) latencies with retinal neurons and their fibers.
Methods:
We studied 104 eyes. Forty-two eyes from patients with optic neuritis (ON), 28 eyes from patients with multiple sclerosis without involvement of the optic nerves (MS-non-ON), and 34 eyes of normal controls.
Results:
Pattern reversal visual evoked potential latency is more delayed in patients with ON than in patients with multiple sclerosis nonON. Flash visual evoked potential (f-VEP) latency was delayed in both categories. Peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer (pRNFL) and ganglion cell/inner plexiform layer (GCIPL) thickness was lower in patients with ON and multiple sclerosis non-ON. In patients with ON, f-VEP latencies correlated negatively with pRNFL thickness but not GCIPL thickness. In patients with ON, PRVEP latencies did not correlate with pRNFL thickness but correlate negatively with GCIPL thickness.
Conclusions:
Patients with ON have delayed VEPs and thinner optical coherence tomography values. Flash visual evoked potentials correlate with pRNFL, indicating axonal pathology. PRVEP correlate with GCIPL, indicating ganglion cell pathology. Abnormal PRVEP with preserved normal f-VEP indicate isolated myelin damage. Abnormalities in both PRVEP and f-VEP indicate myelin and axonal damage in the optic nerve. Combining the results of PRVEP, f-VEP, pRNFL, and GCIPL, one can define the location, type, and extent of the lesion in the macula and optic nerve.
