SAGE Journals Online
Advertisement
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Chu, N.-S.
Right arrow Articles by Wu, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Chu, N.-S.
Right arrow Articles by Wu, T.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Motor Evoked Potentials in Acute Cerebral Infarction: Correlations with Muscle Strength, Babinski Sign, and Hyperreflexia

Nai-Shin Chu, MD

Department of Neurology, Chang Gung Medical College and Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan

Tony Wu, MD

Department of Neurology, Chang Gung Medical College and Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan

The relationship between motor evoked potentials (MEPs) and common motor signs in stroke were studied in 100 patients within a mean of 7.5 days after cerebral infarction. Magnetically evoked motor responses were classified into type 1, normal response; type 2, prolonged central motor conduction and/or decreased response amplitude; and type 3, absent response. MEPs were highly correlated with muscle strength. The transition from type 1 to type 2 response was the muscle weakness of 4/5, and the transition from type 2 to type 3 response was the muscle weakness of 3/5 for the upper limb and 2-3/5 for the lower limb. MEPs also had a good correlation with Babinski sign, and the transition between the presence and the absence of this motor sign was the type 2 response. There was a correlation between MEPs and hyperreflexia for the upper limb, but not for the lower limb. It is concluded that MEPs are useful in the evaluation of motor function abnormalities in acute stroke.

Key Words: Motor evoked potential • Magnetic brain stimulation • Cerebral infarction • Cerebrovascular disease.

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, Vol. 5, No. 3, 181-186 (1991)
DOI: 10.1177/136140969100500305
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?




Advertisement