一种确定异常神经肌肉难治性部位的试验

IF 2 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES
Hatice Tankisi , Hugh Bostock , Peter Grafe
{"title":"一种确定异常神经肌肉难治性部位的试验","authors":"Hatice Tankisi ,&nbsp;Hugh Bostock ,&nbsp;Peter Grafe","doi":"10.1016/j.cnp.2021.11.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The relative refractory period (RRP) of motor axons is an important parameter in nerve excitability tests of the recovery cycle (RC). Abnormalities may have a site in the axonal membrane, the neuromuscular junction, or in a dysfunction of the muscle. We aimed in this study to determine the site of abnormality, using a modified protocol of the conventional RC test, whereby an additional supramaximal stimulus is added at the same interstimulus interval as in RC recordings (RCSM).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Twenty-four healthy subjects aged 37.8 ± 2.4 years (mean ± SE) were examined with median nerve excitability testing using RC and RCSM protocols at normal temperature (34.1 ± 0.2 °C). The recordings were repeated in 12 subjects after selective cooling of the thenar muscle (25.2 ± 0.7 °C) and in 12 subjects after cooling the nerve trunk at the wrist (24.9 ± 0.3 °C).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>After cooling the nerve, RRP measured with RC and RCSM were prolonged similarly (medians by 1.8 ms, and 2.1 ms respectively). In contrast, cooling the muscle prolonged RRP measured with RC (by 1.3 ms), but did not significantly prolong RRP measured with RCSM. RRPs measured by RC and RCSM were significantly different when cooling was at the muscle (P = 5.10<sup>-4</sup>), but not when cooling was at the nerve (P = 0.57).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>A difference between RC and RCSM indicates abnormal excitability distal to the axonal membrane under the stimulating electrode.</p></div><div><h3>Significance</h3><p>Combining RCSM with the conventional RC protocol should help to localize the site of abnormal neuromuscular refractoriness.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45697,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Neurophysiology Practice","volume":"7 ","pages":"Pages 1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/07/e9/main.PMC8693356.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A test to determine the site of abnormal neuromuscular refractoriness\",\"authors\":\"Hatice Tankisi ,&nbsp;Hugh Bostock ,&nbsp;Peter Grafe\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cnp.2021.11.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The relative refractory period (RRP) of motor axons is an important parameter in nerve excitability tests of the recovery cycle (RC). Abnormalities may have a site in the axonal membrane, the neuromuscular junction, or in a dysfunction of the muscle. We aimed in this study to determine the site of abnormality, using a modified protocol of the conventional RC test, whereby an additional supramaximal stimulus is added at the same interstimulus interval as in RC recordings (RCSM).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Twenty-four healthy subjects aged 37.8 ± 2.4 years (mean ± SE) were examined with median nerve excitability testing using RC and RCSM protocols at normal temperature (34.1 ± 0.2 °C). The recordings were repeated in 12 subjects after selective cooling of the thenar muscle (25.2 ± 0.7 °C) and in 12 subjects after cooling the nerve trunk at the wrist (24.9 ± 0.3 °C).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>After cooling the nerve, RRP measured with RC and RCSM were prolonged similarly (medians by 1.8 ms, and 2.1 ms respectively). In contrast, cooling the muscle prolonged RRP measured with RC (by 1.3 ms), but did not significantly prolong RRP measured with RCSM. RRPs measured by RC and RCSM were significantly different when cooling was at the muscle (P = 5.10<sup>-4</sup>), but not when cooling was at the nerve (P = 0.57).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>A difference between RC and RCSM indicates abnormal excitability distal to the axonal membrane under the stimulating electrode.</p></div><div><h3>Significance</h3><p>Combining RCSM with the conventional RC protocol should help to localize the site of abnormal neuromuscular refractoriness.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45697,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Neurophysiology Practice\",\"volume\":\"7 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 1-6\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/07/e9/main.PMC8693356.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Neurophysiology Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2467981X21000470\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Neurophysiology Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2467981X21000470","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的运动轴突的相对不应期(RRP)是神经兴奋性恢复周期(RC)试验的一个重要参数。异常可能发生在轴突膜、神经肌肉连接处或肌肉功能障碍。在这项研究中,我们的目的是确定异常的位置,使用传统RC测试的改进方案,即在与RC记录(RCSM)相同的刺激间隔时间内添加额外的超极大刺激。方法对24名年龄37.8 ± 2.4 岁(平均 ± SE)的健康受试者在常温(34.1 ± 0.2 °C)下采用RC和RCSM两种方法进行正中神经兴奋性测试。12名受试者在选择性冷却大鱼际肌(25.2 ± 0.7 °C)和12名受试者在冷却腕部神经干(24.9 ± 0.3 °C)后重复记录。结果神经冷却后,RC和RCSM测量的RRP延长相似(中位数分别为1.8 ms和2.1 ms)。相比之下,冷却肌肉延长了RC测量的RRP(1.3 ms),但没有显著延长rsm测量的RRP。当肌肉冷却时,RC和RCSM测量的rrp有显著差异(P = 5.10-4),但当神经冷却时,rrp无显著差异(P = 0.57)。结论RC与RCSM的差异提示在刺激电极作用下轴突远端兴奋性异常。意义RCSM与常规RC联合应用有助于定位神经肌肉异常难治性部位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

A test to determine the site of abnormal neuromuscular refractoriness

A test to determine the site of abnormal neuromuscular refractoriness

A test to determine the site of abnormal neuromuscular refractoriness

A test to determine the site of abnormal neuromuscular refractoriness

Objective

The relative refractory period (RRP) of motor axons is an important parameter in nerve excitability tests of the recovery cycle (RC). Abnormalities may have a site in the axonal membrane, the neuromuscular junction, or in a dysfunction of the muscle. We aimed in this study to determine the site of abnormality, using a modified protocol of the conventional RC test, whereby an additional supramaximal stimulus is added at the same interstimulus interval as in RC recordings (RCSM).

Methods

Twenty-four healthy subjects aged 37.8 ± 2.4 years (mean ± SE) were examined with median nerve excitability testing using RC and RCSM protocols at normal temperature (34.1 ± 0.2 °C). The recordings were repeated in 12 subjects after selective cooling of the thenar muscle (25.2 ± 0.7 °C) and in 12 subjects after cooling the nerve trunk at the wrist (24.9 ± 0.3 °C).

Results

After cooling the nerve, RRP measured with RC and RCSM were prolonged similarly (medians by 1.8 ms, and 2.1 ms respectively). In contrast, cooling the muscle prolonged RRP measured with RC (by 1.3 ms), but did not significantly prolong RRP measured with RCSM. RRPs measured by RC and RCSM were significantly different when cooling was at the muscle (P = 5.10-4), but not when cooling was at the nerve (P = 0.57).

Conclusions

A difference between RC and RCSM indicates abnormal excitability distal to the axonal membrane under the stimulating electrode.

Significance

Combining RCSM with the conventional RC protocol should help to localize the site of abnormal neuromuscular refractoriness.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
审稿时长
71 days
期刊介绍: Clinical Neurophysiology Practice (CNP) is a new Open Access journal that focuses on clinical practice issues in clinical neurophysiology including relevant new research, case reports or clinical series, normal values and didactic reviews. It is an official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology and complements Clinical Neurophysiology which focuses on innovative research in the specialty. It has a role in supporting established clinical practice, and an educational role for trainees, technicians and practitioners.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信