Can Electrophysiological Studies Predict Multiple Sclerosis Prognosis?
Abstract
Objectives: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an autoimmune neurodegenerative disease with an unpredictable course. MS lesions can affect the evoked
potentials (EP) of electrophysiological studies. In this study, we aimed to predict the prognosis of MS patients with electrophysiological parameters.
Materials and Methods: MS patients with visual EP (VEP) and somatosensorial EP (SEP) were included in the study during two-year period.
Demographic characteristics, MS type, attack numbers, current expanded disability status scales (EDSS), electrophysiological EP, blood tests, first
cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings of the patients were evaluated.
Results: Two hundred and fifty-nine MS patients were evaluated. There was a statistically significant difference between EDSS scores and the
pathologies detected in both electrophysiological examinations (p<0.001). The number of MS attacks were only associated with SEP pathologies
(p=0.045). IgG index of CSF had no significant effect on VEP (p=0.065) but had a statistically significant effect on posterior tibial SEP. Posterior
tibial SEP was statistically significant in two-sided abnormalities in MS patients with an elevated IgG index (p=0.039). MS patients who met the
International Restless Legs Syndrome Study Group consensus criteria had two-sided abnormalities that were statistically significant on both VEP
and tibial SEP examinations (p=0.003 and 0.000, respectively). Patients who had pathology in electrophysiological examinations at the beginning
had statistically significantly more frequent demyelinating lesions in spinal and infratentorial according to current MRI.
Conclusion: EP can predict clinical deterioration in MS patients. Neurophysiological abnormalities can be considered in MS disease as a prognostic factor
Keywords
Multiple Sclerosis, Prognosis, Electrophysiology, Evoked Potentials
References
- 1. Belbasis L, Bellou V, Evangelou E, Ioannidis JP, Tzoulaki I. Environmental risk factors and multiple sclerosis: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Lancet Neurol. 2015;14:263-273.
- 2. Sawcer S, Franklin RJ, Ban M. Multiple sclerosis genetics. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13:700-709.
- 3. Katz Sand I. Classification, diagnosis, and differential diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Curr Opin Neurol. 2015;28:193-205.
- 4. Comi G, Locatelli T, Leocani L, Medaglini S, Rossi P, Martinelli V. Can evoked potentials be useful in monitoring multiple sclerosis evolution? Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol Suppl. 1999;50:349-357.
- 5. Lublin FD, Reingold SC, Cohen JA, et al. Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: the 2013 revisions. Neurology. 2014;83:278-286.
- 6. Thompson AJ, Banwell BL, Barkhof F, et al. Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria. Lancet Neurol. 2018;17:162-173.
- 7. Giffroy X, Maes N, Albert A, Maquet P, Crielaard JM, Dive D. Do evoked potentials contribute to the functional follow-up and clinical prognosis of multiple sclerosis? Acta Neurol Belg. 2017;117:53-59.
- 8. Hardmeier M, Fuhr P. Multimodal Evoked Potentials as Candidate Prognostic and Response Biomarkers in Clinical Trials of Multiple Sclerosis. J Clin Neurophysiol. 2021;38:171-180.
- 9. Allen RP, Picchietti DL, Garcia-Borreguero D, et al. Restless legs syndrome/ Willis-Ekbom disease diagnostic criteria: updated International Restless Legs Syndrome Study Group (IRLSSG) consensus criteria--history, rationale, description, and significance. Sleep Med. 2014;15:860-873.
- 10. Giffroy X, Maes N, Albert A, Maquet P, Crielaard JM, Dive D. Multimodal evoked potentials for functional quantification and prognosis in multiple sclerosis. BMC Neurol. 2016;16:83.