This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

John R. Hughes, MD, PhD; Steven M. Zak, MD
Department of Neurology University of Illinois Medical Center Chicago, IL 60612

Arch Neurol. 1988;45(5):491-492.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply.

—We are pleased to have the opportunity of clarifying one special point in our article on electroencephalography and clinical changes in patients with slowly growing tumors. The statement of Bleck et al that magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is more sensitive than computed tomography (CT) in these patients is likely correct, and we would be in agreement with them. However, Bleck et al need to be, and hopefully are, aware that the MRI can be so sensitive that it can be positive in and around areas of the brain with actively discharging foci. Thus, false-positive results can occur, suggesting a space-occupying lesion that is not there, and our own group¹ was one of the first of many to report this interesting phenomenon.

The more important issue, perhaps, is the "serious ethical and moral question." Bleck et al mention that our "conclusion is misleading," and we believe that they are absolutely correct . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?