Literature DB >> 60477

[Methods and evaluation of visually evoked EEG potentials in cases of suspected multiple sclerosis (author's transl)].

D Lehmann, Z Mir.   

Abstract

In multiple sclerosis, average EEG potentials which are monocularly evoked by checkerboard pattern reversal frequently show increased latencies of the dominant, occipitally positive peak (more than 110 ms), and latency differences of more than 6--7 ms between responses to right and left eye stimulation. Fixation of the stimulus field at the lower border causes significantly longer latencies and smaller amplitudes than fixation at the upper border. With lower border fixation, the increase of response latency may suggest a reversal of response polarity in extreme cases. Central fixation often but not always results in responses similar to upper border fixation. In order to have minimal variability of the results, fixation of the stimulus field at the upper border is preferred over central fixation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1976        PMID: 60477     DOI: 10.1007/bf00313271

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurol        ISSN: 0340-5354            Impact factor:   4.849


  8 in total

1.  Visual evoked responses in the diagnosis and management of patients suspected of multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  P Asselman; D W Chadwick; D C Marsden
Journal:  Brain       Date:  1975-06       Impact factor: 13.501

2.  Differential diagnosis of multiple sclerosis by visual evoked potential recording.

Authors:  B A Milner; D Regan; J R Heron
Journal:  Brain       Date:  1974-12       Impact factor: 13.501

3.  Delayed visual evoked response in optic neuritis.

Authors:  A M Halliday; W I McDonald; J Mushin
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1972-05-06       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Contrast evoked responses in man.

Authors:  H Spekreijse; L H van der Twell; T Zuidema
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1973-08       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Visual evoked response in diagnosis of multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  A M Halliday; W I McDonald; J Mushin
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1973-12-15

6.  Source locations of pattern-specific components of human visual evoked potentials. II. Component of extrastriate cortical origin.

Authors:  D A Jeffreys; J G Axford
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1972       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Differences between the occipital distribution of upper and lower field pattern-evoked responses in man.

Authors:  W F Michael; A M Halliday
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  1971-09-24       Impact factor: 3.252

8.  Changes in pattern-evoked responses in man associated with the vertical and horizontal meridians of the visual field.

Authors:  A M Halliday; W F Michael
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1970-06       Impact factor: 5.182

  8 in total
  11 in total

1.  Pattern reversal evoked cortical responses in normals. A study of different methods of stimulation and potential reproducibility.

Authors:  O Meienberg; L Kutak; C Smolenski; H P Ludin
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  1979       Impact factor: 4.849

2.  Foveal interocular time thresholds and latency differences in multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  W H Ehrenstein; K Manny; G Oepen
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 4.849

3.  Evaluation of various brain structures in multiple sclerosis with multimodality evoked potentials, blink reflex and nystagmography.

Authors:  W Tackmann; H Strenge; R Barth; A Sojka-Raytscheff
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  1980       Impact factor: 4.849

4.  Visual evoked responses to the upper and lower half-field stimulation in a dark-adapted man.

Authors:  J Peregrin; I Pastrnáková; A Pastrnák
Journal:  Pflugers Arch       Date:  1978-08-25       Impact factor: 3.657

5.  Monocular and binocular evoked average potential field topography: upper and lower hemiretinal stimuli.

Authors:  E Adachi-Usami; D Lehmann
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Pattern and flash visual evoked responses in multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  A Neetens; Y Hendrata; J van Rompaey
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  1979-03-22       Impact factor: 4.849

7.  Visual evoked potentials (VEP) elicited by checkerboard versus foveal stimulation in multiple sclerosis. A clinical study in 235 patients.

Authors:  G Oepen; C Brauner; M Doerr; U Thoden
Journal:  Arch Psychiatr Nervenkr (1970)       Date:  1981

8.  Right/left differences of median nerve evoked scalp potentials in multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  D Lehmann; U Gabathuler; G Baumgartner
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  1979-07-11       Impact factor: 4.849

9.  Multichannel evoked potential fields show different properties of human upper and lower hemiretina systems.

Authors:  D Lehmann; W Skrandies
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1979-03-09       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Subclinical visual field defects in multiple sclerosis. Demonstration and quantification with automated perimetry, and comparison with visually evoked potentials.

Authors:  O Mienberg; J Flammer; H P Ludin
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  1982       Impact factor: 4.849

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.