Abstract
3/2008
vol. 110
Original paper
Value of mfVEP test in pituitary tumors diagnosis
- Z Katedry i Kliniki Okulistyki Pomorskiej Akademii Medycznej w Szczecinie
- Z Wojewódzkiej Poradni Endokrynologicznej w Szczecinie
- Z Kliniki Endokrynologii, Nadciśnienia Tętniczego i Chorób Przemiany Materii Pomorskiej Akademii Medycznej w Szczecinie
- Z Zakładu Higieny i Epidemiologii Pomorskiej Akademii Medycznej w Szczecinie
Online publish date: 2008/09/15
Purpose: To evaluate the mfVEP test in detection of the optic nerve neuropathy in pituitary tumors.
Material and methods: We examined 30 eyes of 15 patients with confirmed by MRI pituitary tumors (7 patients with macroadenomas and 8 patients with microadenomas). In all patients the routine ophthalmologic examination, multifocal visual evoked
potentials (mfVEP) and standard static perimetry (central 24-2 threshold), were performed. The control group consisted of 30
eyes of 15 healthy persons.
Results: In 53% (16/30) of eyes manifested changes in static perimetry and/or in mfVEP test. In 13% (4/30) of eyes abnormal
static perimetry and mfVEP were simultaneously observed. The only mfVEP abnormalities were the most frequent feature and
were observed in 30% (9/30) of eyes. Only abnormal static perimetry results were observed in 10% (3/10) of eyes. In those
eyes in related areas of mfVEP recordings the mean peak-to-peak amplitude was significantly reduced compare to the control
group. In mfVEP test statistically significant peak-to-peak amplitude reduction was observed in superotemporal quadrants in
comparison to the control group (p < 0.009).
Conclusions: MfVEP can be useful test in the optic nerve dysfunction/ neuropathy diagnosis in patients with pituitary tumors.
Material and methods: We examined 30 eyes of 15 patients with confirmed by MRI pituitary tumors (7 patients with macroadenomas and 8 patients with microadenomas). In all patients the routine ophthalmologic examination, multifocal visual evoked
potentials (mfVEP) and standard static perimetry (central 24-2 threshold), were performed. The control group consisted of 30
eyes of 15 healthy persons.
Results: In 53% (16/30) of eyes manifested changes in static perimetry and/or in mfVEP test. In 13% (4/30) of eyes abnormal
static perimetry and mfVEP were simultaneously observed. The only mfVEP abnormalities were the most frequent feature and
were observed in 30% (9/30) of eyes. Only abnormal static perimetry results were observed in 10% (3/10) of eyes. In those
eyes in related areas of mfVEP recordings the mean peak-to-peak amplitude was significantly reduced compare to the control
group. In mfVEP test statistically significant peak-to-peak amplitude reduction was observed in superotemporal quadrants in
comparison to the control group (p < 0.009).
Conclusions: MfVEP can be useful test in the optic nerve dysfunction/ neuropathy diagnosis in patients with pituitary tumors.
Keywords
pituitary tumors, mfVEP, static perimetry
Integrated with
