Pattern-Stimulated Visual Evoked Potential in Dog: Changes in Elicited Response with Pattern Size and Calculation of Visual Acuity

• Published in: Journal of Veterinary Medical Science Vol. 72; no. 11; pp. 1449 - 1453
• Main Authors: ITOH, Yoshiki, MAEHARA, Seiya, OKADA, Keisuke, IZUMISAWA, Yasuharu
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Japan JAPANESE SOCIETY OF VETERINARY SCIENCE 01.11.2010
• Subjects: Animals; Calibration; canine; Conscious Sedation - methods; Conscious Sedation - veterinary; Dogs - physiology; Evoked Potentials, Visual - physiology; Female; Male; Pattern Recognition, Visual - physiology; pattern size; pattern stimulation; Reference Values; Retina - physiology; Visual Acuity; visual evoked potential
• ISSN: 0916-7250; 1347-7439; 1347-7439
• DOI: 10.1292/jvms.10-0073

The aim of this research was to evaluate the changes in the response of pattern-stimulated visual evoked potential (pVEP) with different pattern size, and demonstrate visual acuity from the minimum visual angle. pVEP was recorded from both eyes of six healthy beagles. Prior to pVEP recording, the dogs were sedated, and a traction fiber was used to prevent the eye from rolling down. The stimulator was set 30 cm from the subject's eye. Pattern reversal frequency of the stimulating monitor was 3 rev/sec, and pattern size was set at seven levels; 14-364 arc-min (1.2-31.4 mm). Amplitude of the P100 component was evaluated, and visual acuity was calculated from the minimum visual angle to obtain a pVEP response. A pVEP response (2.3-3.1 μV) was obtained from all subjects. The P100 component was detectable in 3 eyes with a check size of 14 arc-min and 7 eyes with 28 arc-min, and the component was undetectable with 14 arc-min in all subjects in which it was undetectable with 28 arc-min. From the minimum level to obtain the P100 component, the subjects' visual acuity was extrapolated as 0.54-2.14 cycles per degree. We demonstrated the change in P100 component with check size. However, our technique was inadequate to examine visual acuity because the subject's refractive index was ignored. We suggest that, with further study, pVEP with different check sizes would be applicable for canine visual acuity examination.