Cited by 26Multiple Sclerosis Research StudiesPeripheral Neuropathies and DisordersPeripheral Nerve Disorders

Clinical neurophysiology of multiple sclerosis

Letizia Leocani, Gıancarlo Comı·2014·Handbook of Clinical Neurology

Abstract

The availability of new treatments able to modify the natural course of multiple sclerosis (MS) has generated interest in paraclinical measures to monitor disease evolution. Among these, neurophysiologic measures, mainly evoked potentials (EPs), are used in the functional assessment of central sensorimotor and cognitive networks affected by MS. EP abnormalities may reveal subclinical lesions, objectivate the involvement of sensory and motor pathways in the presence of vague disturbances, and provide indications of the demyelinating nature of the disease process. However, their diagnostic value is much lower than that of magnetic resonance imaging, and is more sensitive to brain and cervical spinal cord lesions. The application of EPs in assessing disease severity and monitoring the evolution of nervous damage is more promising, thanks to their good correlation with disability in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies, and potential use as paraclinical endpoints in clinical trials. Recent evidence indicates that EPs performed early in the disease may help to predict a worse future progression in the long term. If confirmed, these data suggest the possible usefulness of EPs in the early identification of patients who are more likely to develop future disability, thus requiring more frequent monitoring or being potential candidates for more aggressive disease-modifying treatments.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/b978-0-444-52001-2.00028-5

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In some patients with suspected MS, further supportive information can be obtained from cerebrospinal fluid examination and neurophysiological testing.

    “but in some patients, further supportive information can be obtained from cerebrospinal fluid examination and neurophysiological testing.”

    From Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: progress and challenges (2017) · cites this paper as [16]

  • A prolonged latency and well-preserved waveform on evoked potential testing is suggestive of demyelination but is not specific.

    “A prolonged latency and well-preserved waveform on evoked potential testing is suggestive of demyelination but is not specific.16”

    From Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: progress and challenges (2017) · cites this paper as [16]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Leocani, L., & Comı, G.
Affiliations
IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele (IT)
Venue
Handbook of Clinical Neurology
Publisher
Elsevier
Published
2014
Volume
122
Pages
671-679
ISSN
0072-9752 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W122088443
Cited by
26
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 2
FWCI
12.01
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Handbook of clinical neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Peripheral Neuropathies and Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Peripheral Nerve Disorders
Keywords
multiple sclerosis, evoked potentials, disease surveillance, disability progression, disease-modifying therapy, subclinical lesions, demyelination, cognitive impairment, clinical trial endpoints
MeSH terms
Brain, Cognition, Evoked Potentials, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Multiple Sclerosis, Disease Progression

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review