Literature DB >> 87495

Pattern and flash visual evoked responses in multiple sclerosis.

A Neetens, Y Hendrata, J van Rompaey.   

Abstract

In multiple sclerosis (MS), increase of delay may be important, but the earlier change is the behavior of the wave shape; amplitude is always lower even in MS patients without visual subjective symptomatology, provided not only flash but also pattern stimulation is performed. Normal amplitude with pattern stimulation does not necessarily mean normal with flash. Combining both stimulation methods, we obtained lowering of amplitude and change of wave shape in 100% of cases while latency was increased in only 77% of cases. Sectorial ischemic neuropathy, and open angle glaucoma patients show the same findings, which emphasizes that the method is not specific for demyelinating diseases, nor selective for papillomacular bundle involvement, but that VER, considering only its first components, reflects axonal damage somewhere in the visual pathway. Flash and pattern VER might be even more pathognomonic in MS than oligoclonal gammaglobulin fractionation on agar, positive in 75% of cases. It is suggested that subclinical MS cases should be submitted to full electro-ophthalmographic investigation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1979        PMID: 87495     DOI: 10.1007/BF00313952

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


  15 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.  Averaging in E.R.G. and V.E.R. first clinical results.

Authors:  A Neetens; R Trau; H Schneider
Journal:  Bull Soc Belge Ophtalmol       Date:  1975

3.  [Recording of visual evoked potentials in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis].

Authors:  F Chain; J Mallecourt; M Leblanc; F Lhermitte
Journal:  Rev Neurol (Paris)       Date:  1977-02       Impact factor: 2.607

4.  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

5.  Variation in latency times of visually evoked cortical potentials.

Authors:  G H Van Lith; G W Van Marle; T M Van Dok-Mak
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  1978-04       Impact factor: 4.638

6.  Gel isoelectric focusing of cerebrospinal fluid proteins: a potential diagnostic tool.

Authors:  P Delmotte
Journal:  Z Klin Chem Klin Biochem       Date:  1971-07

7.  Subclinical optic neuropathy in multiple sclerosis. How early VER components reflect axon loss and conduction defects in optic pathways.

Authors:  M Feinsod; W F Hoyt
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  1975-11       Impact factor: 10.154

8.  Visual evoked responses and visual symptoms in multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  T Hoeppner; F Lolas
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  1978-06       Impact factor: 10.154

9.  Application of visually evoked response near the threshold of vision to objective measurement of dark adaptation.

Authors:  K Fujimura; Y Tsuchida; Y Morita; J H Jacobson
Journal:  Am J Ophthalmol       Date:  1975-01       Impact factor: 5.258

10.  Pattern visual evoked responses in multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  J A Zeese
Journal:  Arch Neurol       Date:  1977-05
View more
  1 in total

1.  Central nervous system involvement in optic neuritis.

Authors:  E A Sanders; J P Reulen; L A Hogenhuis
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  1984-03       Impact factor: 10.154

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.