200 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3622587)
1. Multiple sclerosis diagnosis: magnetic resonance imaging compared with other paraclinical examinations.
Rumbach L; Warter JM; Marescaux C; Gounot D; Chambron J; Collard M
Eur Neurol; 1987; 27(2):92-6. PubMed ID: 3622587
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Multiple sclerosis diagnosis: magnetic resonance imaging compared with other instrumental examinations.
Rumbach L; Collard M; Warter JM; Marescaux C; Armspach JP; Gounot D; Chambron J
Ital J Neurol Sci; 1987 Jun; Suppl 6():125-8. PubMed ID: 3654174
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparative impact of paraclinical studies in establishing the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis.
Gilmore RL; Kasarskis EJ; Carr WA; Norvell E
Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol; 1989 Nov; 73(5):433-42. PubMed ID: 2479522
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [The diagnostic value of nuclear magnetic resonance tomography, multimodal evoked potentials and cerebrospinal fluid examination in multiple sclerosis].
Staffen W; Trinka E; Ladurner G
Nervenarzt; 1993 Apr; 64(4):226-32. PubMed ID: 8506010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Multiple sclerosis. Magnetic resonance imaging, evoked potentials and cerebrospinal fluid analysis.
David P; Ristori GP; Elia M; Bartoli A; Ciervo A; Massaro AR; Carbone G
Acta Neurol (Napoli); 1990 Jun; 12(3):200-6. PubMed ID: 2403026
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Importance of paraclinical and CSF studies in the diagnosis of MS in patients presenting with partial cervical transverse myelopathy and negative cranial MRI.
Bashir K; Whitaker JN
Mult Scler; 2000 Oct; 6(5):312-6. PubMed ID: 11064439
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Trimodal evoked potentials compared with magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis.
Giesser BS; Kurtzberg D; Vaughan HG; Arezzo JC; Aisen ML; Smith CR; LaRocca NG; Scheinberg LC
Arch Neurol; 1987 Mar; 44(3):281-4. PubMed ID: 3827679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Association between clinical conversion to multiple sclerosis in radiologically isolated syndrome and magnetic resonance imaging, cerebrospinal fluid, and visual evoked potential: follow-up of 70 patients.
Lebrun C; Bensa C; Debouverie M; Wiertlevski S; Brassat D; de Seze J; Rumbach L; Pelletier J; Labauge P; Brochet B; Tourbah A; Clavelou P;
Arch Neurol; 2009 Jul; 66(7):841-6. PubMed ID: 19597085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [The combined use of instrumental and laboratory examinations in multiple sclerosis: is the diagnostic facilitation real?].
Paolino E; Granieri E; Tola MR; Govoni V; Casetta I; Monetti VC; Carreras M
Riv Neurol; 1990; 60(2):73-81. PubMed ID: 2247751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Evaluation of patients with multiple sclerosis by evoked potentials and magnetic resonance imaging: a comparative study.
Cutler JR; Aminoff MJ; Brant-Zawadzki M
Ann Neurol; 1986 Nov; 20(5):645-8. PubMed ID: 3789682
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The sensitivity of multimodal evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis. A comparison with magnetic resonance imaging and cerebrospinal fluid analysis.
Guérit JM; Monje Argiles A
Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol; 1988 Sep; 70(3):230-8. PubMed ID: 2458229
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Are somatosensory evoked potentials of the tibial nerve the most sensitive test in diagnosing multiple sclerosis?
Djuric S; Djuric V; Zivkovic M; Milosevic V; Jolic M; Stamenovic J; Djordjevic G; Calixto M
Neurol India; 2010; 58(4):537-41. PubMed ID: 20739788
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The diagnosis and classification of multiple sclerosis: evoked responses and spinal fluid electrophoresis.
Bartel DR; Markand ON; Kolar OJ
Neurology; 1983 May; 33(5):611-7. PubMed ID: 6682499
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. [Visual, early auditory and somatosensory evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis (917 cases)].
Fischer C; Mauguière F; Ibañez V; Courjon J
Rev Neurol (Paris); 1986; 142(5):517-23. PubMed ID: 3787054
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Multimodal evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis: a contribution to diagnosis and classification.
Cosi V; Citterio A; Battelli G; Bergamaschi R; Grampa G; Callieco R
Ital J Neurol Sci; 1987 Jun; Suppl 6():109-12. PubMed ID: 3654170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Sensitivities and predictive values of paraclinical tests for diagnosing multiple sclerosis.
Filippini G; Comi GC; Cosi V; Bevilacqua L; Ferrarini M; Martinelli V; Bergamaschi R; Filippi M; Citterio A; D'Incerti L
J Neurol; 1994 Jan; 241(3):132-7. PubMed ID: 8164014
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Multimodal evoked potentials and CSF findings in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis.
Morocutti C; Pozzessere G; Valle E; Mollica MA; Quadrini R; Sanarelli L; Rizzo PA; Amabile G
Riv Neurol; 1987; 57(3):175-80. PubMed ID: 3672010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison between magnetic resonance imaging and other techniques in 39 multiple sclerosis patients.
Comi G; Canal N; Martinelli V; Medaglini S; Locatelli T; Triulzi F; Del Maschio A; Banfi G
Riv Neurol; 1987; 57(1):44-7. PubMed ID: 3629129
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The initial diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: clinical impact of magnetic resonance imaging.
Gebarski SS; Gabrielsen TO; Gilman S; Knake JE; Latack JT; Aisen AM
Ann Neurol; 1985 May; 17(5):469-74. PubMed ID: 4004170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Brain-stem auditory evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis: the relation to VEP, SEP and CSF immunoglobulins.
Sand T; Sjaastad O; Romslo I; Sulg I
J Neurol; 1990 Oct; 237(6):376-8. PubMed ID: 2277273
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
