4.5 Article

How somatosensory evoked potentials improve the diagnosis of the disturbance of consciousness: A retrospective analysis

期刊

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/0954898X.2023.2269263

关键词

Disorders of consciousness; interpeak latency; repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation; somatosensory evoked potentials

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the correlation between upper limb somatosensory evoked potentials (USEPs) and consciousness disorders. It was found that rTMS treatment could shorten the N13-N20 latency and there was a negative correlation between N13-N20 and the score of consciousness disorders. These findings suggest that N13-N20 can serve as an objective index for evaluating consciousness disorders.
The interpeak latency is a crucial characteristic of upper limb somatosensory evoked potentials (USEPs). However, the existing research on the correlation between interpeak latency and consciousness disorders is currently limited. We aimed to investigate how USEPs can contribute to the diagnosis of consciousness disorders. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 10 patients who underwent repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for consciousness disorders. The interpeak latency N13-N20, Glasgow coma scale (GCS), and Chinese Nanjing persistent vegetative state scale (CNPVSS) were evaluated before and after rTMS treatment, and the linear correlation between N13-N20, GCS, and CNPVSS was analysed. The scores of CNPVSS and GCS significantly increased in the first, second, and third months after rTMS. The N13-N20 was shorter in the second and third months after rTMS compared to before treatment. rTMS was found to shorten the N13-N20 latency, and there was a negative correlation between N13-N20 and the score of consciousness disorders. N13-N20 can serve as an objective index for evaluating consciousness disorders. This research provides potential insights for doctors in diagnosing patients with consciousness disorders.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据