摘要目的 探讨体感诱发电位(somatosensory evoked potential,SEP)、脑干听觉诱发电位(brainstem auditory evoked potentials,BAEP)、事件相关电位P300检测对持续植物状态(persistent vegetative state,PVS)患者预后判定的作用.方法 采用前瞻性队列研究,对PVS患者进行SEP、BAEP、P300检测,并分析其与格拉斯哥昏迷量表(GCS)评分的关系.结果 35例PVS患者预后不良组P300波潜伏期[(424.00±51.39)ms]较预后良好组[(374.00±67.92)ms]明显延长,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),预后不良组与预后良好组患者P300波振幅无明显差异(P>0.05),N20的存在与消失(单侧或双侧)、波幅及潜伏期在预后不良及预后良好组之间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),35例患者听觉诱发电位均中重度异常,听觉诱发电位分级与预后的关系差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论 P300潜伏期可作为预测PVS患者预后的指标.

abstractsObjective To investigate the effects of somatosensory evoked potential ( SEP) , brainstem auditory evoked potential ( BAEP ) and event-related potential ( P300 ) on the prognosis of patients with persistent vegetative state (PVS). Methods SEP, BAEP, and P300 were detected in PVS patients and the relationship with the Glasgow Coma Scale ( GCS) was analyzed in the study. Results Study results of the 35 cases with PVS showed that the latency of P300 in the poor prognosis group (424. 00 ± 51. 39 ms) was significantly longer than that(374. 00 ± 67. 92 ms) in the good prognosis group, and statistical significance could be seen, when comparisons were made between them (P<0. 05). There was no significant difference in the amplitude of P300 between the poor and good prognosis groups (P <0. 05). There was no statistical significance between the poor and good prognosis groups in the presence and absence of N20 ( one side or both sides) , and statistical significance could neither be seen in the amplitude and latency, when comparisons were made between the poor and good prognosis groups (P <0. 05). The BAEP of the 35 patients all showed moderate to severe abnormality, but there was no statistical significance in the relationship between BAEP grades and prognosis (P<0. 05). Conclusion P300 latency could be used as an indicator in the prediction of prognosis for those patients with persistent vegetative state.