多种诱发电位和MRI检查在多发性硬化诊断中的价值

目的：探讨诱发电位和磁共振成像（MRI）检查在多发性硬化（MS）诊断中的价值。方法：收集65例MS患者的临床资料、磁刺激运动诱发电位（MEP）、脑干听觉诱发电位（BAEP）、视觉诱发电位（VEP）、体感诱发电位（SEP）以及MRI结果，比较不同检测方法对其临床诊断的价值。结果：MS患者的磁刺激MEP、BAEP、VEP、SEP以及MRI的异常检出率分别为78％（51／65）、51％（33／05）、80％（52／65）、71％（46／65）和85％（55／65）。4项诱发电位检查总异常检出率为88％（57／65），与MRI检查结果比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。各种诱发电位和MRI检查均能发现临床下病灶：6例患者经MRI检查发现病灶但无相应临床症状；8例患者有临床症状而MRI检查未见相应病灶，但诱发电位检查可见异常。结论：MRI和各种诱发电位检查具有相互补充作用，结合临床合理选择使用此两种检查有助于提高MS诊断的敏感性。

The utility of evoked potentials and magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis of multiple sclerosis

Objective：To explore the clinical value of evoked potentials and magnetic resonance ima- ging（MRI） in diagnosis of multiple sclerosis（MS）. Methods.. Sixty five patients with MS were reviewed. The clinical features,motor evoked potential（MEP）,brain stem auditory evoked potential（BAEP）, visual evoked potential（VEP）, somatosensory evoked potential（SEP）and magnetic resonance imaging（MRI） were analysed and compared retrospectively. Results：Of 65 patients with MS, the abnormal rate of MEP, BAEP, VEP, SEP and MRI were 78%, 51 % 80 %, 71%, 85%, respectively. At least 88 % of the patients had abnormal results in one of the four kinds of evoked potentials. Both MRI and evoked potentiails detec- ted subclinical lesions. There was no statistieal difference between abnormal rate of head MR1 and EPS（P 〉0.05）. MRI showed lesions without relevant signs and symptoms in 6 patients. 8 patients had symp- toms and signs with normal MRI, while EP showed abnormal results. Conclusion： Evoked potentials could complement MRI and increase the sensitivity for diagnosis of MS.