METHODS: Stimuli were presented in both monocular and dichoptic conditions at eight visual field locations/eye. The incommensurate stimulus frequencies ranged from 15.45 to 21.51 Hz. Five stimulus conditions differing in spatial frequency and orientation were examined for three viewing conditions. The resulting 15 stimulus conditions were examined in 16 normal subjects who repeated all conditions twice.
RESULTS: Several significant independent effects were identified. Response amplitudes were reduced for dichoptic viewing (by 0.85 times, p<4 x 10(-11)); offset by increases in responses for between eye differences of one octave of spatial frequency: lower (1.15 times, 0.1 cpd); higher (1.29 times, 0.4 cpd), both p<1.8 x 10(-7). Crossed orientations produced significant effects upon response phase (p=0.023) but not amplitude (p=0.062).
CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated that dichoptic evoked potentials using multifocal frequency-doubling illusion stimuli are practical. The use of crossed orientation, or differing spatial frequencies, in the two eyes reduced binocular interactions.
SIGNIFICANCE: The results indicate a method wherein several spatial or temporal and frequencies per visual field region can be tested in reasonable time using a multifocal VEP using spatial frequency-doubling stimuli.
METHODS: We measured psychophysical contrast thresholds in one eye of 16 control subjects and 19 patients aged 67.8 ± 5.65 and 71.9 ± 7.15, respectively, (mean ± SD). Patients ranged in disease severity from suspects to severe glaucoma. We used the 17-region FDT-perimeter C20-threshold program and a custom 9-region test (R9) with similar visual field coverage. The R9 stimuli scaled their spatial frequencies with eccentricity and were modulated at lower temporal frequencies than C20 and thus did not display a clear spatial frequency-doubling (FD) appearance. Based on the overlapping areas of the stimuli, we transformed the C20 results to 9 measures for direct comparison with R9. We also compared mfVEP-based and psychophysical contrast thresholds in 26 younger (26.6 ± 7.3 y, mean ± SD) and 20 older normal control subjects (66.5 ± 7.3 y) control subjects using the R9 stimuli.
RESULTS: The best intraclass correlations between R9/C20 thresholds were for the central and outer regions: 0.82 ± 0.05 (mean ± SD, p ≤ 0.0001). The areas under receiver operator characteristic plots for C20 and R9 were as high as 0.99 ± 0.012 (mean ± SE). Canonical correlation analysis (CCA) showed significant correlation (r = 0.638, p = 0.029) with 1 dimension of the C20 and R9 data, suggesting that the lower and higher temporal frequency tests probed the same neural mechanism(s). Low signal quality made the contrast-threshold mfVEPs non-viable. The resulting mfVEP thresholds were limited by noise to artificially high contrasts, which unlike the psychophysical versions, were not correlated with age.
CONCLUSION: The lower temporal frequency R9 stimuli had similar diagnostic power to the FDT-C20 stimuli. CCA indicated the both stimuli drove similar neural mechanisms, possibly suggesting no advantage of FD stimuli for mfVEPs. Given that the contrast-threshold mfVEPs were non-viable, we used the present and published results to make recommendations for future mfVEP tests.