Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-l4ctd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-17T07:58:07.065Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Multiple Regression Analysis of Diagnostic Predictors In Optic Nerve Disease

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2015

T.H. Kirkham  and
S.G. Coupland
T.H. Kirkham*
Affiliation:
the McGill University Departments of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Ophthalmology and Montreal Neurological Hospital and institute, Montreal, Québec, Canada
S.G. Coupland
Affiliation:
the McGill University Departments of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Ophthalmology and Montreal Neurological Hospital and institute, Montreal, Québec, Canada
*
Neuro-Ophthalmology Department, Room 201, Montreal Neurological Hospital, 3801 University St., Montreal Québec, Canada, H3A 2B4
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Demyelination is assumed to be the cause of the majority of cases of isolated optic neuritis. Because of the importance of establishing the presence of optic nerve dysfunction in patients suspected of having multiple sclerosis several new indices of optic nerve conduction have been reported including the visual evoked potential, the edge-light pupil cycle time, and the Pulfrich test. These measures purport to detect optic nerve dysfunction but with varying degrees of success. This study of 93 patients with clearly documented previous optic neuritis was conducted to determine the statistical relationship between these three measures and other clinical diagnostic indices for detection of previous optic nerve disease and the utility of the diagnostic predictors taken individually, and in combination. The other indices used were the presence of detectable optic atrophy, color vision defect and the presence of a relative afferent pupillary defect. The variables were submitted to linear stepwise multiple regression analysis which indicated that the presence of optic atrophy, defective color vision and prolonged pupil cycle time when used in combination provided the most useful diagnostic prediction of previous optic neuritis in this group of patients. The addition of visual evoked potentials, the Pulfrich test or presence of a relative afferent pupillary defect did not significantly increase predictive reliability.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , February 1981 , pp. 67 - 72
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Neurological Sciences Federation 1981

References

Adams, C.W.M. (1977). Pathology of multiple sclerosis: progression of the lesion. Brit. Med. Bull., 33, 15–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowden, A.N., Bowden, P.M.A., Friedmann, A.I. and Rose, F.C. (1974). Atrial of corticotrophin gelatin injection in acute optic neuritis. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiat., 37, 869–873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burde, R.M. and Gallin, P.F. (1975). Visual parameters associated with recovered retrobulbar optic neuritis. Amer. J. Ophthalmol., 79, 1034–1037.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, M.M., Lessell, S. and Wolf, P.A. (1979). A prospective study of developing multiple sclerosis in uncomplicated optic neuritis. Neurology (Minn.), 29, 208–213.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Compston, D.A.S., Batchelor, J.R., Earl, C.J. and McDonald, W.I. (1978). Factors influencing the risk of multiple sclerosis developing in patients with optic neuritis. Brain, 101, 495–511.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ellis, C.J.K. (1979). The afferent pupillary defect in acute optic neuritis. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiat., 42, 1008–1017.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferguson, G.A. (1966). Statistical analysis in psychology and education. McGraw-Hill Publishing Company. 2nd edition.Google Scholar
Frisen, L. and Hoyt, W.F. (1974). Insidious atrophy of retinal nerve fibres in multiple sclerosis. Arch. Ophthalmol., 82, 91–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frisen, L., Hoyt, W.F., Bird, A.C. and Weale, R. A. (1973). Diagnostic uses of the Pulfrich phenomenom. Lancet, 2, 385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, E.S., Bird, A.C., Leaver, P.K. and McDonald, W.I. (1977). Treatment of optic neuritis by retrobulbar injection of triamcinolone. Brit. Med. J., 1, 1495–1497.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, S.D. and Thompson, H.S. (1978). Pupil cycle time in optic neuritis. Amer. J. Ophthalmol., 85, 635–642.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neetens, A., Hendrata, Y. and Van Rompaey, J. (1979). Pattern and flash visual evoked responses in multiple sclerosis. J. Neurol., 220, 113–124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paty, D.W. and Ebers, G.C. (1979). Clinical prognostic markers in multiple sclerosis. Can. J. Neurol. Sci., 6, 382.Google Scholar
Regan, D. and Beverley, K.I. (1973). Disparity detectors in human depth per ception: evidence for directional selectivity. Science, 181, 877–879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, W. (1970). Stereopsis and steroblindness. Exp. Brain Res., 10, 380–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tackmann, W., Strenge, H., Barth, R. and Sojka-Raytscheff, A. (1979). Diagnostic validity for different components of pattern shift visual evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis. Eur. Neurol., 18, 243–248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thompson, H.S. (1966). Afferent pupillary defects. Pupillary findings associated with defects of the afferent arm of the pupillary light reflex arm. Amer. J. Ophthalmol., 62, 860–873.Google ScholarPubMed
Trojaborg, W. and Petersen, E.(1979). Visual and somatosensory evoked cortical potentials in multiple sclerosis. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiat., 42, 323–330.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wildberger, H.G.H. and Van Lith, G.H.M. (1976). Color vision and visually evoked response (VECP) in the recovery period of optic neuritis. Mod. Probl. Ophthalmol., 17, 320–324.Google ScholarPubMed
Wilson, W.B. and Keyser, R.B. (1980). Comparison of the pattern and diffuse-light visual evoked responses in definite multiple sclerosis. Arch. Neurol., 37, 30–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed