Evoked potentials in Parkinson’s disease

  • J. Jörg
Conference paper
Part of the Key Topics in Brain Research book series (KEYTOPICS)


Diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease ist not yet possible with neurophysiological methods. Therefore we investigated the median somatosensory and visually evoked potentials (SEP and VEP) to single and double stimulation, VEP using a special stimulation technique. Also we investigated the peripheral autonomic surface potentials (PASP) and motor evoked potentials (MEP) employing spinal and transcranial stimulation.

In Parkinson’s disease the absolute and relative refractory periods of cortical N 1 peak of SEP did not differ from that of normal subjects. After single stimulation the cortical N 20 latencies were only delayed in 2 of 17 cases. In 8 of 10 cases central conduction time was normal. The SEP peaks of brain stem were also normal and there was no correlation between symptomatology and SEP results.

The data of motor evoked potentials (MEP) demonstrated in all patients a normal central motor conduction time of 5.0 ms. In 3 of 10 patients PASP’s were delayed but not reduced. In 30% of patients the VEP data showed a significant delay of P 2 latency, often independently of clinical status or age. But there were no more P 2 alterations after special visual stimulation techniques.


Refractory Period Motor Evoke Potential Conduction Time Somatosensory Evoke Potential Sympathetic Skin Response 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aminoff MJ, Wilcox CS (1971) Assessment of autonomic function in patients with a Parkinsonian syndrome. Br Med J 4: 80–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Enzensberger W, Fischer PA (1986) Hirnelektrische Befunde bei Parkinson-Patienten im Langzeitverlauf. In: Fischer PA (Hrsg) Spätsyndrome der Parkinson-Krankheit. Editiones Roche, Basel, pp 159–171Google Scholar
  3. Gerhard H, Jörg J (1986) Motor conduction time of tractus corticospinalis by spinal stimulation. Z EEG-EMG 17: 197–200Google Scholar
  4. Jörg J, Gerhard H (1987) Somatosensory motor and special visual evoked potentials to single and double stimulation in “Parkinson’s disease”—an early diagnostic test? J Neural Transm [Suppl] 25: 81–88Google Scholar
  5. Jörg J, Gerhard H (1988) Median somatosensory evoked potentials to single and double stimulation in normal subjects and in Parkinson’s disease. In: Barber C, Blum Th (eds) Evoked potentials III. Butterworth (in print)Google Scholar
  6. Knezevic W, Bajada S (1985) Peripheral autonomic surface potential. A quantitative technique for recording sympathetic conduction in man. J Neurol Sci 67: 239–251PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Nightingale S, Mitchell KW, Howe JW (1986) Visual evoked cortical potentials and pattern electroretinograms in Parkinson’s disease and control subject. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatr 49: 1280–1287PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Shahani BT, Halperin JJ, Boulu Ph, Cohen J (1984) Sympathetic skin response—a method of assessing unmyelinated axon dysfunction in peripheral neuropathies. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatr 47: 536–542PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Sollazo D (1985) Influence of L-Dopa/carbidopa on pattern reversal VEP: behavioural differences in primary and secondary parkinsonism. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 61: 236–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag/Wien 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Jörg
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of NeurologyUniversity of WuppertalWuppertalFederal Republic of Germany

Personalised recommendations