DISCRIMINATIVE POWER OF VISUAL-EVOKED POTENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS IN MULTIPLE-SCLEROSIS
DISCRIMINATIVE POWER OF VISUAL-EVOKED POTENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS IN MULTIPLE-SCLEROSIS
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/bf01203860
复制
发表时间：
1995-01-01
影响因子：
1.4
通讯作者：
HOMMES, OR
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
CUYPERS, MHM;DICKSON, K;HOMMES, OR
为探讨图形翻转视觉诱发电位特征（峰值潜伏期和波幅）在多发性硬化诊断中的鉴别力，以及视觉诱发电位波幅的增加是否能提高视觉诱发电位的鉴别力，我们回顾性研究了59例确诊的多发性硬化患者和126例对照者的视觉诱发电位。使用了两种检查尺寸（17“和10”）。女性有显着更高的振幅和较短的潜伏期比男性。随年龄增长，N80潜伏期逐渐延长，P100波幅逐渐降低。P100潜伏期在20 - 55岁之间稳定，但在儿童和老年人中增加。采用多变量判别分析方法，探讨视觉诱发电位峰值潜伏期和波幅在区分两组中的意义。58%的多发性硬化患者的视觉诱发电位可测到10'图形。在判别分析中单独使用P100振幅导致正确分类病例的百分比为84%，而P100和N80潜伏期分别为85%和90%。在17'模式下，N80潜伏期的正确率也高于P100潜伏期。虽然N80潜伏期比P100潜伏期受年龄、性别和刺激图形大小的影响更大，但当考虑这些影响时，N80潜伏期在多发性硬化的分类中比P100潜伏期更敏感。结合使用潜伏期和振幅进行判别分析，正确分类病例的百分比没有显着提高。
To investigate the discriminative power of pattern-reversal visual evoked potential characteristics (peak latencies and amplitude) and to test whether the addition of visual evoked potential amplitude can increase the power of the visual evoked potential in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis, we retrospectively studied visual evoked potentials in 59 patients with definite multiple sclerosis and 126 control subjects. Two check sizes (17' and 10') were used. Females had significantly higher amplitudes and shorter latencies than males. N80 latency showed a gradual increase and P100 amplitude a decrease with age. P100 latency was stable between the ages of 20 and 55 years but was increased in childhood and the elderly. The significance of visual evoked potential peak latencies and amplitude in separating the two groups was investigated by means of a (multivariate) discriminant analysis. The visual evoked potential with a pattern of 10' could be measured in 58% of patients with multiple sclerosis. The exclusive use of the P100 amplitude in the discriminant analysis resulted in a percentage of correctly classified cases of 84%, whereas for P100 and N80 latency it was 85% and 90%, respectively. With the 17' pattern, the N80 latency yielded also a higher correct percentage than did the P100 latency. Although N80 latency is, to a greater extent than P100 latency, influenced by age, sex and size of stimulus pattern, when these influences are accounted for, the N80 latency is st more sensitive measure than P100 latency in the classification of multiple sclerosis. Combined use of latency and amplitude for discriminant analysis yielded no significant improvement of the percentage of correctly classified cases.