ArticleIranian journal of neurology2012
Optical coherence tomography versus visual evoked potential in multiple sclerosis patients.
Article in Iranian journal of neurology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Optic coherence tomography findings in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients of the northwest of Iran.Iranian journal of neurology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOptical coherence tomography (OCT) is a non-invasive instrument, which can be used to estimate the thickness of the retinal nerve fibre layer (RNFL) and provides an indirect measurement of axonal destruction in multiple sclerosis (MS). The main aim of this study was to find out any correlations between P100 latency in visual evoked potential (VEP) and RNFL thickness.
methodsThe patients with the definite history of optic neuritis regardless of the diagnosis of MS were included. The eyes with the history of blurred vision and increased VEP latency (> 115 milliseconds) were considered as cases and the eyes with normal latency were regarded as controls. RNFL thickness was compared between two groups of cases and controls. In addition, the correlation between VEP P100 latency and RNFL thickness in four quadrants of superior, nasal, inferior and temporal fields was estimated by spearman correlation coefficient. RNFL thickness between the patients with history of clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) was also compared to other two subgroups of RRMS and SPMS.
resultsThere was significant negative correlation between VEP P100 latency and RNFL. In all four quadrants, with increasing VEP latency, RNFL thickness decreased. Furthermore, there was significant correlation between P100 latencies and mean RNFL thickness [Pearson correlation coefficient = -0.527, P < 0.001; RNFL (mean) = (-0.44 ± 0.087) × P100 + (153.6 ± 10.94)]. Comparing RNFL thickness between three groups of CIS, RRMS, and SPSM, no significant difference was detected in RNFL thickness (P > 0.05). Power analysis demonstrated that RNFL average had the highest area under curve.
conclusionOCT does have good correlations with P100 latency, indicating retinal non-myelinated axonal involvement in early stages in addition to the myelinated axonal involvement. However, it cannot be used as the sole test in evaluating visual pathway in optic neuritis and complementary tests as VEPs are recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24250852PMC3829235What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.