You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 42 No. 11, November 1985 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTIONS
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (16)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

The Value of Visual Evoked Potential as a Screening Test in Neurofibromatosis

Bahman Jabbari, MD; Charles G. Maitland, MD; Laura M. Morris, MD; Judith Morales, MD; Carl H. Gunderson, MD

Arch Neurol. 1985;42(11):1072-1074.


Abstract

• Pattern reversal visual evoked potential (VEP) test was performed in 30 asymptomatic patients with neurofibromatosis (NF). All patients had normal visual acuity, visual fields, and ophthalmoscopic examination results. Pattern reversal VEP was abnormal in eight patients (26%). Seven of these patients had computed tomographic scans with reformated orbital views. Orbital computed tomographic scans were abnormal in six patients and in each case showed enlargement of the optic nerve on the side of VEP abnormality. Our data indicate that pattern reversal VEP is a valuable screening test in asymptomatic patients with NF. Because of the high incidence of VEP abnormality in such patients, VEP abnormality must be interpreted cautiously when a patient with NF is suspected of having other diseases or disorders that potentially affect the visual pathways.



Author Affiliations

From the Department of Neurology, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Md, and the Neurology Service, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC.


Footnotes

Accepted for publication Dec 6, 1984.

The opinions or assertions contained herein are the private views of the authors and are not to be construed as official or reflecting the views of the Department of Defense or the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences.

Reprint requests to Box 310, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC 20307 (Dr Jabbari).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   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?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Clinical and Instrumental (Magnetic Resonance Imaging [MRI] and Multimodal Evoked Potentials) Follow-Up of Brain Lesions in Three Young Patients With Neurofibromatosis 1
Margari et al.
J Child Neurol 2006;21:1085-1090.
ABSTRACT  

Neurofibromatosis 1 (Recklinghausen Disease) and Neurofibromatosis 2 (Bilateral Acoustic Neurofibromatosis) An Update
Mulvihill et al.
ANN INTERN MED 1990;113:39-52.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1985 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.