Comparative impact of paraclinical studies in establishing the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis

Gilmore, Robin L.; Kasarskis, Edward J.; Carr, W.Allen; Norvell, Elaine

doi:10.1016/0013-4694(89)90093-x

Cited by 10 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The diagnosis is based on the clinical demonstration of CNS white matter disease, with multiple lesions occurring at different times in separate anatomic sites. 43,45 However, VEPs and PTN-SSEPs are methods of choice to evaluate the optic nerve 47,52 and spinal cord 47 in the evaluation of patients suspected of having multiple sclerosis. 25-11) and MRI permits the clinician to probe the brain and spinal cord in regions which may be clinically "silent" to the examiner.…”

Section: Multiple Sclerosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Somatosensory Evoked Potentials in Pediatrics—Abnormal

Gilmore¹

2006

Clinical Neurophysiology of Infancy, Childhood, and Adolescence

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SSEPs are useful in evaluating children in coma. In a series of 43 children in coma from head trauma or hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy in which all children had Abnormal Evoked Potentials 25 Somatosensory Evoked Potentials in Pediatrics-Abnormal ROBIN L. GILMOREFIGURE 25-1 Comparison of the median nerve evoked short latency (bottom two traces) and longer latency (top traces) potentials in a normal child and a child with degenerative disease. In the bottom two traces the analysis time is 20 milliseconds. In the normal child, three short-latency positive potentials are recorded in the Cz′-hand reference lead (arrowheads). In the Cz′-ear lead only the second two potentials are seen (arrowheads). In the patient, only the first two positive potentials are recorded in the Cz′-hand reference lead (arrowheads). Only the second positive potential is seen in the Cz′-ear lead (arrow). The analysis time in the top traces is 200 milliseconds. In the normal child the Cz′-ear lead yields prominent longer latency potentials. No response is recorded in the patient. (From Cracco JB, Bosch VV, Cracco RQ: Cerebral and spinal somatosensory evoked potentials in children with CNS degenerative disease. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1980;49:437-445.) C4 C4 -Shoulder C4 C4 -Ear Spine -Cz Cz ' ' ' FIGURE 25-12 Median nerve somatosensory evoked potentials in a 7-year-old girl with severe injury to the brachial plexus at birth. Note that this child has no avulsion, the dorsal root ganglion is intact, and a sensory potential is recorded over Erb's point. Only a P9 is recorded in the C4′-shoulder lead and a barely detectable N9 in the C7 spine-Cz′ lead. Potentials are absent in the C4′-ear lead. (From Cracco JB, Bosch VV, Cracco RQ: Cerebral and spinal somatosensory evoked potentials in children with CNS degenerative disease. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1980;49: 437-445.) Cz' FIGURE 25-13 Posterior tibial nerve somatosensory evoked potentials from a young child with Guillain-Barré syndrome. The time base and polarity are identical to those of Figure 25-8. No potential rostral to the peripheral N5 is identified.

show abstract