Background:
@EN Blepharospasm and apraxia of lid opening (ALO) are nonparalytic causes of involuntary eyelid closure (IEC). Recently Aramideh (1994) divided the IEC into 5 groups by electromyography (EMG) study, and reported that each group had different
responses
to Botulinum A toxin treatment.
@ES Objective:
@EN We looked whether clinical observation can match the EMG, and possibly predict the response to Botulinum A toxiu treatment.
@ES Method:
@EN Based on EMG study of Aramideh (1994), clinically observable characteristics of each group were defined. One of the authors reviewed the videotapes of IEC and applied the above criteria to make the clinical diagnosis. Other author blinded to
the
clinical information performed 2 channel EMG of levator palpebrae superioris (LP) and orbicularis oculi (OO) muscles, and made the EMG diagnosis. Clinical and EMG diagnoses were matched.
@ES Results:
@EN Twenty five patients (5 men and 20 women) were included in the study. Clinically, 16 were diagnosed as group I (blepharospasm), 1 as group III(combined blepharospasm and LP motor impersistence), 7 as group IV(combined blepharospasm and
involuntary
LP inhibition), and 1 as group V(involuntary LP inhibition). There were no patient in group II(combined dystonic activities of LP and OO). On EMG study, 14 were diagnosed as group I, 2 as group II, 1 as group III, 7 as group IV, and 1 as group V.
The
mismatch between the two diaggnoseis occurred between group I and IV in 4 patients, group I and II in 2, and group I and III in 2.
@ES Conclusion:
@EN Clinical observations are generally correct in predicting EMG diagnosis. However groups with mixed features (II, III, and IV) are difficult to diagnose by clinical observation only. Usefulness of clinical and EMG diagnosis on predicting
Botulinum A
toxin response will need to be evaluated.
|