Clinical application of motion-onset visual evoked potentials.

The results of motion-onset visual evoked potentials and pattern-reversal visual evoked potentials were compared in 5 adults with amblyopia, in 13 patients with unilateral retrobulbar neuritis and in 62 patients with multiple sclerosis. While the pattern-reversal visual evoked potentials had reduced amplitudes and prolonged latencies in all amblyopic eyes, the motion-onset visual evoked potentials were normal. Thus, motion-onset visual evoked potentials cannot be used for diagnosis of amblyopia. In patients with retrobulbar neuritis, both types of visual evoked potentials were delayed on stimulation of the affected eye. The latency increase was, however, greater for pattern-reversal visual evoked potentials than for motion-onset visual evoked potentials. Examination of the patients with multiple sclerosis showed that the additional use of motion-onset visual evoked potentials increased the sensitivity of the investigation. In some patients, only the motion-onset visual evoked potentials had pathologic latency increases, whereas the pattern-reversal visual evoked potentials stayed within normal limits.