Summary
One hundred patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) were analysed retrospectively with respect to investigations of brain-stem auditory evoked potentials (BAEP), pattern reversal visual evoked potentials (VEP), somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP), and cerebrospinal fluid immunoglobulins (CSF-IG). BAEP were abnormal in 42% of those with normal VEP and SEP examinations, and in 38% of patients with normal CSF-IG. The chance of obtaining at least one abnormal EP was lower in patients with normal CSF-IG than in patients with abnormal CSF. When a “dispersion ratio” was included in the criteria for BAEP abnormality, the sensitivity increased compared with conventional BAEP criteria. We recommend that BAEP should still be included in the EP test battery for patients with suspected MS.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Bartel DR, Markand OM, Kolar OJ (1983) The diagnosis and classification of multiple sclerosis: evoked responses and spinal fluid electrophoresis. Neurology 33:611–617
Eisen A, Cracco RQ (1983) Overuse of evoked potentials: caution. Neurology 33:618–621
Fleiss JL (1981) Statistical methods for rates and proportions. Wiley, New York, pp 161–187
Ganes T, Brautaset NJ, Nyberg-Hansen R, Vandvik B (1986) Multimodal evoked responses and cerebrospinal fluid oligoclonal immunoglobulins in patients with multiple sclerosis. Acta Neurol Scand 73:472–476
Hammond SR, Yiannikas C, Chan YW (1986) A comparison of brainstem auditory evoked responses evoked by rarefaction and condensation stimulation in control subjects and in patients with Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome and multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci 74:177–190
Hughes JR, Stone JL, Fino JJ, Hart LA (1987) Usefulness of different stimuli in visual evoked potentials. Neurology 37:656–662
Hutchinson M, Blandford S, Glynn D, Martin EA (1984) Clinical correlates of abnormal brain-stem auditory evoked responses in multiple sclerosis. Acta Neurol Scand 69:90–95
Olsson JE, Link H, Muller R (1976) Immunoglobulin abnormalities in multiple sclerosis: relation to clinical parameters: disability, duration and age of onset. J Neurol Sci 27:233–245
Polman CH, Koetsier JC, Wolters EC (1985) Multiple sclerosis: incorporation of results of laboratory techniques in the diagnosis. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 87:187–192
Poser CM, Paty DW, Scheinberg L, McDonald I, Davis FA, Ebers GC, Johnson KP, Sibley WA, Silberberg DH, Tourtelotte WW (1983) New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines for research protocols. Ann Neurol 13:227–231
Rose AS, Ellison GW, Myers LW, Tourtelotte WW (1976) Criteria for the clinical diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Neurology 26 [Suppl]:20–22
Sand T, Sulg I (1984) The influence of click phase and rate upon latencies and latency distributions of the normal brainstem auditory evoked potentials. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 57:561–570
Stockard JJ, Stockard JE, Sharbrough FW (1982) Brainstem auditory evoked potentials. In: Aminoff M (ed) Electrodiagnosis in clinical medicine. Churchill-Livingstone, New York, pp 370–413
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sand, T., Sjaastad, O., Romslo, I. et al. Brain-stem auditory evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis: the relation to VEP, SEP and CSF immunoglobulins. J Neurol 237, 376–378 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00315663
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00315663