分析术中视觉诱发电位以纳入不稳定视网膜电图。

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology Pub Date : 2024-11-07 DOI:10.1097/WNP.0000000000001129
Eva Cochard, Nadia Bérard, Karl Schaller, Colette Boëx
{"title":"分析术中视觉诱发电位以纳入不稳定视网膜电图。","authors":"Eva Cochard, Nadia Bérard, Karl Schaller, Colette Boëx","doi":"10.1097/WNP.0000000000001129","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The objectives of the study were to evaluate the validity of intraoperative flash visual evoked potentials (VEPs) when electroretinograms (ERGs) were unstable, to compare white versus red light-emitting diodes, and to assess the impact of luminance on ERG variability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty patients were included (Inomed system; pre- and postoperative visual fields). Possible changes in visual fields were assessed with mean defects in perimetry. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of normalized VEPs and of normalized and corrected VEPs with ERGs were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-two eyes could be analyzed in 20 patients (mainly gliomas and meningiomas): 2 had a severe defect in their visual field, and 6 had a mild defect. The receiver operating characteristic curve indicated (1) normalized and corrected VEPs with ERGs were more reliable than normalized VEPs only (P < 0.03) and (2) an alarm threshold of 80% of normalized and corrected VEPs. No significant difference in variability of ERGs was found with white or red light-emitting diodes with this system. Increased luminance improved stability of ERGs (P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Normalization and correction of VEPs with ERGs improved the validity of VEPs and indicated a 20% decrease as alarm criterion. This normalization and correction with peripheral excitation could be generalized to improve the reliability of neuromonitoring.</p>","PeriodicalId":15516,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of Intraoperative Visual Evoked Potentials for Inclusion of Unstable Electroretinograms.\",\"authors\":\"Eva Cochard, Nadia Bérard, Karl Schaller, Colette Boëx\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/WNP.0000000000001129\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The objectives of the study were to evaluate the validity of intraoperative flash visual evoked potentials (VEPs) when electroretinograms (ERGs) were unstable, to compare white versus red light-emitting diodes, and to assess the impact of luminance on ERG variability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty patients were included (Inomed system; pre- and postoperative visual fields). Possible changes in visual fields were assessed with mean defects in perimetry. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of normalized VEPs and of normalized and corrected VEPs with ERGs were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-two eyes could be analyzed in 20 patients (mainly gliomas and meningiomas): 2 had a severe defect in their visual field, and 6 had a mild defect. The receiver operating characteristic curve indicated (1) normalized and corrected VEPs with ERGs were more reliable than normalized VEPs only (P < 0.03) and (2) an alarm threshold of 80% of normalized and corrected VEPs. No significant difference in variability of ERGs was found with white or red light-emitting diodes with this system. Increased luminance improved stability of ERGs (P < 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Normalization and correction of VEPs with ERGs improved the validity of VEPs and indicated a 20% decrease as alarm criterion. This normalization and correction with peripheral excitation could be generalized to improve the reliability of neuromonitoring.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15516,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/WNP.0000000000001129\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/WNP.0000000000001129","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:该研究旨在评估当视网膜电图(ERG)不稳定时术中闪光视觉诱发电位(VEP)的有效性,比较白光和红光发光二极管,并评估亮度对ERG变异性的影响:共纳入 30 名患者(Inomed 系统;术前和术后视野)。视野中可能出现的变化是通过周视测量中的平均缺陷来评估的。比较归一化 VEP 和归一化及校正 VEP 与 ERG 的接收器操作特征曲线(ROC):对 20 名患者(主要是胶质瘤和脑膜瘤)的 32 只眼睛进行了分析:其中 2 眼视野严重缺损,6 眼轻度缺损。接收器操作特征曲线显示:(1) 归一化和校正后的 VEPs 与 ERGs 比仅归一化的 VEPs 更可靠(P < 0.03);(2) 报警阈值为归一化和校正后 VEPs 的 80%。该系统使用白色或红色发光二极管时,ERG 的变异性无明显差异。增加亮度可提高 ERG 的稳定性(P < 0.05):结论:用ERG对VEPs进行归一化和校正可提高VEPs的有效性,并将减少20%作为报警标准。这种用外周兴奋进行归一化和校正的方法可以推广,以提高神经监测的可靠性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Analysis of Intraoperative Visual Evoked Potentials for Inclusion of Unstable Electroretinograms.

Purpose: The objectives of the study were to evaluate the validity of intraoperative flash visual evoked potentials (VEPs) when electroretinograms (ERGs) were unstable, to compare white versus red light-emitting diodes, and to assess the impact of luminance on ERG variability.

Methods: Thirty patients were included (Inomed system; pre- and postoperative visual fields). Possible changes in visual fields were assessed with mean defects in perimetry. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of normalized VEPs and of normalized and corrected VEPs with ERGs were compared.

Results: Thirty-two eyes could be analyzed in 20 patients (mainly gliomas and meningiomas): 2 had a severe defect in their visual field, and 6 had a mild defect. The receiver operating characteristic curve indicated (1) normalized and corrected VEPs with ERGs were more reliable than normalized VEPs only (P < 0.03) and (2) an alarm threshold of 80% of normalized and corrected VEPs. No significant difference in variability of ERGs was found with white or red light-emitting diodes with this system. Increased luminance improved stability of ERGs (P < 0.05).

Conclusions: Normalization and correction of VEPs with ERGs improved the validity of VEPs and indicated a 20% decrease as alarm criterion. This normalization and correction with peripheral excitation could be generalized to improve the reliability of neuromonitoring.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology
Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.20%
发文量
198
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​The Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology features both topical reviews and original research in both central and peripheral neurophysiology, as related to patient evaluation and treatment. Official Journal of the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society.
期刊最新文献
Sleep Deprivation in Healthy Males Increases Muscle Afferents, Impairing Motor Preparation and Reducing Endurance. Alpha-Delta Ratio for Detection of Cerebral Injury and Stroke in Pediatric Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation. Asymmetry of Directed Brain Connectivity at Birth in Low-Risk Full-Term Newborns. EEG Infrastructure Within the Veterans Administration: A Survey. The Role of High-Resolution Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of Nerve Trauma New Perspective: A Preliminary Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Recent Evidence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1