Poltavski Dmitri, Lederer Paul, Cox Laurie Kopko
*PhD †OD, FAAO ‡MSEE Department of Psychology, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, North Dakota (DP); Private Practice, Arlington Heights, Illinois (PL); and Diopsys, Inc., Pine Brook, New Jersey (LKC).
Optom Vis Sci. 2017 Jul;94(7):742-750. doi: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001094.
We investigated whether differences in the pattern visual evoked potentials exist between patients with convergence insufficiency and those with convergence insufficiency and a history of concussion using stimuli designed to differentiate between magnocellular (transient) and parvocellular (sustained) neural pathways.
Sustained stimuli included 2-rev/s, 85% contrast checkerboard patterns of 1- and 2-degree check sizes, whereas transient stimuli comprised 4-rev/s, 10% contrast vertical sinusoidal gratings with column width of 0.25 and 0.50 cycles/degree. We tested two models: an a priori clinical model based on an assumption of at least a minimal (beyond instrumentation's margin of error) 2-millisecond lag of transient response latencies behind sustained response latencies in concussed patients and a statistical model derived from the sample data.
Both models discriminated between concussed and nonconcussed groups significantly above chance (with 76% and 86% accuracy, respectively). In the statistical model, patients with mean vertical sinusoidal grating response latencies greater than 119 milliseconds to 0.25-cycle/degree stimuli (or mean vertical sinusoidal latencies >113 milliseconds to 0.50-cycle/degree stimuli) and mean vertical sinusoidal grating amplitudes of less than 14.75 mV to 0.50-cycle/degree stimuli were classified as having had a history of concussion. The resultant receiver operating characteristic curve for this model had excellent discrimination between the concussed and nonconcussed (area under the curve = 0.857; P < .01) groups with sensitivity of 0.92 and specificity of 0.80.
The results suggest a promising electrophysiological approach to identifying individuals with convergence insufficiency and a history of concussion.
我们使用旨在区分大细胞(瞬态)和小细胞(持续)神经通路的刺激,研究了集合不足患者与有脑震荡病史的集合不足患者之间模式视觉诱发电位的差异。
持续刺激包括每秒2转、对比度为85%的1度和2度方格大小的棋盘格图案,而瞬态刺激包括每秒4转、对比度为10%的垂直正弦光栅,列宽为0.25和0.50周/度。我们测试了两种模型:一种先验临床模型,基于脑震荡患者瞬态反应潜伏期比持续反应潜伏期至少有最小(超出仪器误差范围)2毫秒延迟的假设;另一种是从样本数据得出的统计模型。
两种模型对脑震荡组和非脑震荡组的区分均显著高于随机水平(准确率分别为76%和86%)。在统计模型中,对0.25周/度刺激的平均垂直正弦光栅反应潜伏期大于119毫秒(或对0.50周/度刺激的平均垂直正弦潜伏期>113毫秒)且对0.50周/度刺激的平均垂直正弦光栅振幅小于14.75毫伏的患者被归类为有脑震荡病史。该模型所得的受试者工作特征曲线对脑震荡组和非脑震荡组有出色的区分能力(曲线下面积 = 0.857;P <.01),灵敏度为0.92,特异性为0.80。
结果表明一种有前景的电生理方法可用于识别有集合不足和脑震荡病史的个体。