Cervical Root Avulsion-Electrophysiological Analysis with Electrospinogram: Case Report

Rosén, Ingmar; Sörnäs, Rune; Elmqvist, D.

doi:10.3109/02844317709025527

Cited by 7 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This technique might also be employed to detect axonal regeneration after traction lesions but is not applicable to the investigation of an acute lesion since the involvement is generally more proximal than any of the available stimulation sites. Although it S. J. Jones is useful to obtain cervical and cortical SEPs in combination with peripheral sensory nerve action potentials (Zalis et al, 1970;Rosen et al, 1977) it should be preferable to record potentials generated in structures immediately proximal and distal to the probable site of the lesion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigation of brachial plexus traction lesions by peripheral and spinal somatosensory evoked potentials.

Jones¹

1979

Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigation of brachial plexus traction lesions by peripheral and spinal somatosensory evoked potentials.

Jones¹

1979

Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical, electrophysiological, and myelographic studies of 9 patients with cervical spinal root avulsions: Discrepancies between EMG and X‐ray findings

Trojaborg¹

1994

Muscle and Nerve

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In traumatic brachial plexus injuries a thorough neurological, electrodiagnostic, and radiological examination is essential to determine treatment and prognosis. The most important diagnostic question concerns the presence or absence of a preganglionic nerve root lesion. Electromyography and motor and sensory conduction studies were performed in 17 patients with traumatic plexus injuries who had myelographic evidence of nerve root avulsion; in 8 of these clinical and electrophysiological features confirmed the X-ray findings. However, in 9 cases there was a discrepancy between myelographic and neurophysiological data regarding the actual number and sites of roots avulsed. Thus, in 2 cases myelography showed avulsion of one more root than did conduction studies and EMG; in 2 others, there was discordance as to the specific roots avulsed; in 4 cases fewer nerve roots seem to be avulsed radiologically than predicted clinically, and in 1, none at all, although clinical and electrophysiological data were compatible with avulsion of four roots. In 6 cases recovery showed that avulsions indicated by clinical and electrophysiological considerations could not have occurred. When both EMG and myelography are misleading, surgical exploration should be considered.

show abstract

Intraoperative Somatosensory Evoked Potential Diagnoses in Brachial Plexus Lesions

Mailänder

Schaller

Möckel

et al. 1990

Peripheral Nerve Lesions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cervical Root Avulsion-Electrophysiological Analysis with Electrospinogram: Case Report

Cited by 7 publications

References 4 publications

Investigation of brachial plexus traction lesions by peripheral and spinal somatosensory evoked potentials.

Investigation of brachial plexus traction lesions by peripheral and spinal somatosensory evoked potentials.

Clinical, electrophysiological, and myelographic studies of 9 patients with cervical spinal root avulsions: Discrepancies between EMG and X‐ray findings

Intraoperative Somatosensory Evoked Potential Diagnoses in Brachial Plexus Lesions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About