Premium
Megnetic motor evoked potentials (MEP) in diseases of the spinal cord
Author(s) -
Linden D.,
Berlit P.
Publication year - 1994
Publication title -
acta neurologica scandinavica
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.967
H-Index - 95
eISSN - 1600-0404
pISSN - 0001-6314
DOI - 10.1111/j.1600-0404.1994.tb02736.x
Subject(s) - transcranial magnetic stimulation , medicine , spinal cord , somatosensory evoked potential , evoked potential , pathological , magnetic resonance imaging , anesthesia , motor cortex , stimulation , pathology , radiology , audiology , psychiatry
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a non‐invasive diagnostic method particularly suited to investigation of the long motor tracts. The clinical value of this method in many cortical and subcortical diseases has been well established, but comparable studies for most spinal cord diseases have still to be made. Forty patients in whom spinal cord disease was established by clinical examination, cerebrospinal fluid examination, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were studied by means of somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP, median and tibial nerve stimulation) and magnetic motor evoked potentials (MEP, first dorsal interosseus and tibialis anterior muscle recordings after transcranial and spinal stimulation). The underlying pathology was neoplastic (n= 16), inflammatory (n= 15) or ischemic (n = 9). Clinical signs and symptoms ranged from slight sensory disturbances to complete paraplegia and had developed within minutes (ischemia) or over many years (benign neoplastic disease). The overall frequency of pathological SEP was slightly higher than that of MEP (78% vs 68%) which was statistically not significant (p > 0.05). This was also true for the subgroups, except for pure motor disorders, which gave the same yield for both methods. Decreased amplitudes or absence of MEP were more frequent in neoplastic than in inflammatory lesions (75% vs 33%, p < 0.05). In the latter, however, MEP more often occurred with increased latencies (40% vs 31%, p > 0.05, n. s.). Pathological SEP were found in 75% of patients presenting with pure motor abnormalities, while pathological MEP were found in 30% of patients with pure sensory disturbances. We conclude, in common with the SEP, the MEP are helpful in the examination of spinal cord diseases, even in subclinical disturbances, although the SEP would seem to yield a larger percentage of pathological results.