HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Permissions Request Permissions Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (5) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Glerant, J. C. Articles by Moxham, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Glerant, J. C. Articles by Moxham, J.

Diaphragm electromyograms recorded from multiple surface electrodes following magnetic stimulation

Respiratory Muscle Laboratory, King's College London School of Medicine, King's College Hospital, London, UK.

CORRESPONDENCE: J. Moxham, Dept of Respiratory Medicine, King's College Hospital, Bessemer Road, London, SE5 9PJ, UK. Fax: 44 2073463589. E-mail: john.moxham{at}kingsch.nhs.uk

Keywords: Diaphragm, magnetic stimulation, reproducibility, surface electrodes

Received: March 11, 2005
Accepted November 3, 2005

The diaphragm compound-muscle action potential (CMAPdi), elicited by unilateral magnetic stimulation (UMS) of the phrenic nerve can be recorded using surface electrodes. However, there is no consensus on the best positioning of surface electrodes and there are no data on the reproducibility of the signal.

Using 36 surface electrode pairs, in five healthy subjects, the CMAPdi elicited by UMS and electrical stimulation (ES) were compared and 12 pairs were identified as providing acceptable signals. The latency and amplitude were measured for each CMAPdi, following UMS at 60–100% of maximal stimulator output, in 12 healthy subjects, on two occasions.

Latencies obtained using UMS and ES ranged between 6.1–7.33 and 6.25–7.17 ms, respectively. Optimum CMAPdi were not recorded from the same electrode pair in all subjects, or for both hemidiaphragms in each subject. However, the optimal recording site for a particular individual remained unchanged on subsequent testing. When recorded from the optimal site, latencies and amplitudes of CMAPdi elicited on the two occasions were not significantly different.

The current study suggests that the use of multiple chest wall electrodes can identify an optimal electrode pair, from which it is possible to obtain reproducible compound-muscle action potential signals.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				E. Z. Ross, A. V. Nowicky, and A. K. McConnell Influence of acute inspiratory loading upon diaphragm motor-evoked potentials in healthy humans J Appl Physiol, May 1, 2007; 102(5): 1883 - 1890. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]