Excitatory and inhibitory responses to cervical root magnetic stimulation in healthy subjects
Objectives: To characterize direct and reflex hand muscle responses to cervical root magnetic stimulation (CRMS) in healthy volunteers during sustained voluntary contraction. Methods: In 18 healthy volunteers, we recorded from the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle the responses to CRMS of progr...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Elsevier
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/080a4430ae134bb994ad4863b5542c35 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | Objectives: To characterize direct and reflex hand muscle responses to cervical root magnetic stimulation (CRMS) in healthy volunteers during sustained voluntary contraction. Methods: In 18 healthy volunteers, we recorded from the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) muscle the responses to CRMS of progressively increasing intensity and level of muscle contraction. The compound muscle action potential (CMAP) and the silent period (SP) were compared to those obtained with plexus, midarm and wrist stimulation. Additionally, in a smaller number of subjects, we obtained the peristimulus time histogram (psth) of single motor unit firing in the FDI, examined the effects of vibration and recorded the modulation of sustained EMG activity in muscles of the lower limbs. Results: Increasing CRMS intensity led to larger CMAP with no relevant changes in SP1 or SP2, except for lower amplitude of the burst interrupting the silent period (BISP). Increasing the level of muscle contraction led to reduced CMAP, shorter SP duration and increased BISP amplitude. The psth analysis showed the underlying changes in the motor unit firing frequency that corresponded to the changes seen in the CMAP and the SP with surface recordings. Progressively distal stimulation led to CMAPs of shorter latency and increased amplitude, SPs of longer latency and shorter duration, and a BISP of longer latency. Vibration led to reduction of the SP. CRMS induced SPs in muscles of the lower limb. Conclusions: CRMS induces excitatory and inhibitory responses in hand muscles, fitting with the expected behavior of mixed nerve stimulation at very proximal sites. Significance: Characterization of the effects of CRMS on hand muscles is of physiological and potentially clinical applicability, as it is a painless and reliable procedure. |
|---|