Visual evoked potential latency predicts cognitive function in people with multiple sclerosis.
Cognitive function
Evoked potential latency
Multiple sclerosis
P100
Processing speed
Visual evoked potentials
Journal
Journal of neurology
ISSN: 1432-1459
Titre abrégé: J Neurol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 0423161
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2021
Nov 2021
Historique:
received:
13
12
2020
accepted:
12
04
2021
revised:
09
04
2021
pubmed:
20
4
2021
medline:
14
10
2021
entrez:
19
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Prior studies have reported an association between visual evoked potentials (VEPs) and cognitive performance in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS), but the specific mechanisms that account for this relationship remain unclear. We examined the relationship between VEP latency and cognitive performance in a large sample of PwMS, hypothesizing that VEP latency indexes not only visual system functioning but also general neural efficiency. Standardized performance index scores were obtained for the domains of memory, executive function, visual-spatial processing, verbal function, attention, information processing speed, and motor skills, as well as global cognitive performance (NeuroTrax battery). VEP P100 component latency was obtained using a standard checkerboard pattern-reversal paradigm. Prolonged VEP latency was significantly associated with poorer performance in multiple cognitive domains, and with the number of cognitive domains in which performance was ≥ 1 SD below the normative mean. Relationships between VEP latency and cognitive performance were significant for information processing speed, executive function, attention, motor skills, and global cognitive performance after controlling for disease duration, visual acuity, and inter-ocular latency differences. This study provides evidence that VEP latency delays index general neural inefficiency that is associated with cognitive disturbances in PwMS.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33870445
doi: 10.1007/s00415-021-10561-2
pii: 10.1007/s00415-021-10561-2
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
4311-4320Informations de copyright
© 2021. Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Barton JL, Garber JY, Klistorner A et al (2019) The electrophysiological assessment of visual function in multiple sclerosis. CNP 4:90–96
pubmed: 31193661
pmcid: 6539333
Odom JV, Bach M, Brigell et al (2016) ISCEV standard for clinical visual evoked potentials: (2016 update). Doc Ophthalmol 133(1):1–9
doi: 10.1007/s10633-016-9553-y
Chirapapaisan N, Laotaweerungsawat S, Chuenkongkaew et al (2015) Diagnostic value of visual evoked potentials for clinical diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Doc Ophtalmol 130(1):25–30
doi: 10.1007/s10633-014-9466-6
You Y, Klistorner A, Thie J et al (2011) Latency delay of visual evoked potential is a real measurement of demyelination in a rat model of optic neuritis. Investig Opthalmol Vis Sci 52(9):6911–6918
doi: 10.1167/iovs.11-7434
Backner Y, Petrou P, Glick-Shames H et al (2019) Vision and vision-related measures in progressive multiple sclerosis. Front Neurol 10:455
doi: 10.3389/fneur.2019.00455
Crnošija L, Gabelić T, Barun B et al (2020) Evoked potentials can predict future disability in people with clinically isolated syndrome. Eur J Neurol 27:437–444
doi: 10.1111/ene.14100
Fuhr P, Borggrefe-Chappius A, Schindler C et al (2001) Visual and motor evoked potentials in the course of multiple sclerosis. Brain 124:2162–2168
doi: 10.1093/brain/124.11.2162
Leocani L, Rovaris M, Boneschi FM et al (2006) Multimodal evoked potentials to assess the evolution of multiple sclerosis: a longitudinal study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiat 77:1030–1035
doi: 10.1136/jnnp.2005.086280
Weinstock-Guttman B, Baier M, Stockton et al (2003) Pattern reversal visual evoked potentials as a measure of visual pathway pathology in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 9:529–534
doi: 10.1191/1352458503ms935rr
Green A, Gelfand J, Cree BA et al (2017) Clemastine fumarate as a remyelinating therapy for multiple sclerosis (ReBuild): a randomized, controlled, double-blind, crossover trial. Lancet 390:2481–2489
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32346-2
Koziolek MJ, Tampe D, Bӓhr M et al (2012) Immunoadsorption therapy in patients with multiple sclerosis with steroid-refractory optical neuritis. J Neuroinflammation 9:80
doi: 10.1186/1742-2094-9-80
Ontaneda D, Thompson AJ, Fox RJ et al (2017) Progressive multiple sclerosis: prospects for disease therapy, repair, and restoration of function. Lancet 389:1357–1366
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31320-4
Cadavid D, Balcer L, Galetta S et al (2017) Safety and efficacy of opicinumab in acute optic neuritis (RENEW): a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Neurol 16:189–199
doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(16)30377-5
Canham LJW, Kane N, Oware A et al (2015) Multimodal neurophysiological evaluation of primary progressive multiple sclerosis—an increasingly valid biomarker with limits. Mult Scler Relat Dis 4:607–613
doi: 10.1016/j.msard.2015.07.009
Tinnefeld M, Treitz FH, Haase CG et al (2005) Attention and memory dysfunctions in mild multiple sclerosis. Eur Arch Psy Clin N 255:319–326
Covey TJ, Shucard JL, Shucard DW (2017) Event-related brain potential indices of cognitive function and brain resource reallocation during working memory in patients with multiple sclerosis. Clin Neurophysiol 128:604–621
doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2016.12.030
Pelosi L, Geesken JM, Holly M et al (1997) Working memory impairment in early multiple sclerosis. Brain 120:2039–2058
doi: 10.1093/brain/120.11.2039
Lisicki M, D’Ostilio, Coppola G et al (2018) Brain correlates of single trial visual evoked potentials in migraine: more than meets the eye. Front Neurol 9:393
doi: 10.3389/fneur.2018.00393
Costa SL, Genova HM, DeLuca J et al (2017) Information processing speed in multiple sclerosis: past, present, and future. Mult Scler J 23(6):772–789
doi: 10.1177/1352458516645869
Holladay JT (1997) Proper method for calculating average visual acuity. J Refract Surg 13(4):388–391
doi: 10.3928/1081-597X-19970701-16
Achiron A, Doniger GM, Harel Y et al (2007) Prolonged response times characterize cognitive performance in multiple sclerosis. Eur J Neurol 14:1102–1108
doi: 10.1111/j.1468-1331.2007.01909.x
Golan D, Wilken J, Doniger GM et al (2019) Validity of a multi-domain computerized cognitive assessment battery for patients with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Dis 30:154–162
doi: 10.1016/j.msard.2019.01.051
Lebrun, C, Blanc, F, Brassat, et al. on behalf of CFSEP (2010) Cognitive function in radiologically isolated syndrome. Mult Scler 16(8):919–925
doi: 10.1177/1352458510375707
Benedict, RHB, DeLuca, J, Phillips, G, et al. and Multiple Sclerosis Outcome Assessments Consortium (2017) Validity of the symbol digit modalities test as a cognition performance outcome measure for multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler J 23(5):721–733
doi: 10.1177/1352458517690821
Van Schependom J, D’hooghe MB, Cleynhens K et al (2014) The symbol digit modalities test as a sentinel test for cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis. Eur J Neurol 21:1219–1225
doi: 10.1111/ene.12463
Drew MA, Starkey NJ, Isler RB (2009) Examining the link between information processing speed and executive function in multiple sclerosis. Arch Clin Neuropsych 24:47–58
doi: 10.1093/arclin/acp007
Llufriu S, Martinez-Heras E, Solana E et al (2017) Structural networks involved in attention and executive functions in multiple sclerosis. NeuroImage Clin 13:288–296
doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2016.11.026
Di Russo F, Martínez A, Sereno MI et al (2001) Cortical sources of the early components of the visual evoked potential. Hum Brain Mapp 15:95–111
doi: 10.1002/hbm.10010
Cooray GK, Sundgren M, Brismar T (2020) Mechanism of visual network dysfunction in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis and its relation to cognition. Clin Neurophysiol 131(2):361–367
doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2019.10.029
Lobsien D, Ettrich B, Sotiriou K et al (2014) Whole-brain diffusion tensor imaging in correlation to visual-evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis: a tract-based spatial statistics analysis. Am J Neuroradiol 35(11):2076–2081
doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A4034
Batista S, Zivadinov R, Hoogs M et al (2012) Basal ganglia, thalamus and neocortical atrophy predicting slowed cognitive processing in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol 259:139–146
doi: 10.1007/s00415-011-6147-1
Bisecco A, Stamenova S, Caiazzo G et al (2018) Attention and processing speed performance in multiple sclerosis is mostly related to thalamic volume. Brain Imaging Behav 12:20–28
doi: 10.1007/s11682-016-9667-6
Houtchens MK, Benedict RH, Killiany R et al (2007) Thalamic atrophy and cognition in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 69(12):1213–1223
doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000276992.17011.b5
Golan D, Doniger GM, Srinivasan J et al (2020) The association between MRI brain volumes and computerized cognitive scores of people with multiple sclerosis. Brain Cogn 145:105614
doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2020.105614
Sundgren M, Nikulin VV, Maurex L, Wahlin A, Piehl F, Brismar T (2015) P300 amplitude and response speed relate to preserved cognitive function in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Clin Neurophysiol 126(4):689–697
doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2014.07.024