de la Parra MME, Matos MMI, González EPE, Galindo TGA

Language: Spanish
References: 16
Page: 74-80
PDF size: 81.24 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To standardize cortical and subcortical recordings of C6, C7 and C8 Dermatomal Somatosensory Evoked Potentials (DSSEP). Material and methods: A descriptive, transversal, observational and not random study of DSSEP using Talavera´s technique was done in two sets of 20 normal subjects. Absolute latencies and amplitudes for generators N9, N13, N17 and P21 and conduction time between N9-N13 and N13-N17 were obtained and analyzed with central tendency measures and the Student´s t test. Results: Average values and standard deviations of all variables were established. Recordings obtained were reproducible for both investigators. Conclusions: We found a high degree of reproducibility and low variability between the two investigators. A standardization of absolute latencies of N9, N13, N17 and P21 generators and conduction time between N9-N13 and N13-N17 was accomplished. Standardization of amplitudes and side to side differences was not possible due to their high variabilit

REFERENCES

1. Chiappa K. Evoked potentials in clinical medicine. Philadelphia, Lippincott-Raven Publishers; 1997.

2. Talavera MR, Estañol B, López MM, García G, Corona V, Plascencia N et al. Registro de potenciales evocados somatosensoriales dermatómicos en punto de Erb, médula cervical y corteza cerebral en el diagnóstico de la radiculopatía cervical. Rev Neurol 2003; 36: 917-924.

3. Eisen A, Horich M, Moll A. Evaluation of radiculopathies by segmental stimulation and somatosensory evoked potentials. Can J Neurol Sci 1983; 10: 178-182.

4. Wilbourn AJ, Aminoff MJ. AAEM Minimonograph No. 32: the electrodiagnostic examination in patients with radiculopathies. Muscle Nerve 1998; 21:1612-1631.

5. Ligouri T, Trojaborg W. Somatosensory evoked potentials from cervical and lumbosacral dermatomes. Acta Neurol Scand 1991; 84: 161-166.

6. Dumitru D, Amato A, Zwarts M. Electrodiagnostic Medicine. Philadelphia, Hanley and Belfus, Inc. 2002.

7. García A, Montes M. Minimonografía PESSD en la evaluación de radiculopatías. Rev Med Fis Rehab 1994; 6: 18-28.

8. Werner R, Cavender D. Evaluating radiculopathy: How useful is electrodiagnostic testing. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Clinical Electrophysiology. State of The Art Reviews 1999 Jul; 13(2).

9. De Lisa JA, Mackenzie K, Baran EM. Manual of nerve conduction velocity and somatosensory evoked potentials. 2nd ed. New York: Raven Press; 1987.

10. Schimscheimer RJ, De Visser BWO, Bour LJ, Kropveld D, Van Ammers VCPJ. Digital Nerve somatosensory evoked potentials and flexor carpi radialis H reflexes in cervical disk protrusion and involvement in the sixth and seventh cervical root: Relations to clinical and myelographic findings. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1988; 70: 313-324.

11. Synek VM. Somatosensory Evoked Potentials after stimulation of digital nerves in upper limbs: Normative data. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1986; 65: 460-463.

12. Gagnard-Landra C. Somatosensory cortical and dermatome evoked potentials: a study conducted on 60 normal subjects. Results and their correlation relative to height and age. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 1996; 36: 131-144.

13. Slimp J. Dermatomal somatosensory evoked potentials. Methodology and clinical applications. Phys Med Rehab Clin North Am 1994; 5: 629-642.

14. Aminoff M, Goodin D, Brabaro N, Weinstein P, Rosenblum M. Dermatomal somatosensory evoked potentials in unilateral lumbosacral radiculopathy. Ann Neurol 1985; 17: 171-176.

15. American Academy of Neurology. Assessment: Dermatomal somatosensory evoked potentials. Neurology 1997; 49: 1127-1130.

16. American Association of Electrodiagnostic Medicine. Guidelines in electrodiagnostic medicine. Muscle and Nerve 1992; 15(2): 229-253.