Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • ERS Guidelines
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • ERS Guidelines
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

Respiratory-related evoked potential elicited in tracheostomised lung transplant patients

P. W. Davenport, A. D. Martin, Y-L. Chou, S. Alexander-Miller
European Respiratory Journal 2006 28: 391-396; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.06.00095005
P. W. Davenport
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
A. D. Martin
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Y-L. Chou
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
S. Alexander-Miller
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

The present study investigated the role of removal of upper airway and lung vagal afferents in the respiratory-related evoked potential (RREP) response to inspiratory occlusions in two patients with a tracheostomy, who had undergone double lung transplantation (DLT).

The patients were 1.5 and 3 months post-DLT and surgical placement of the tracheostomy. RREP recordings in response to inspiratory occlusions were obtained under four conditions: mouth breathing ignore trial; mouth breathing attend trial; tracheostomy breathing attend trial; and tracheostomy breathing ignore trial.

The RREP peak components, Nf, P1 and N1, were present in both mouth and tracheostomy ignore breathing trials. The P300 was present in both mouth and tracheostomy attend trials. RREP peak latencies were similar between conditions. The peak amplitudes were greater with mouth breathing due to greater occlusion-related inspiratory pressure.

These results demonstrate that the respiratory-related evoked potential can be elicited with inspiratory occlusion in the absence of mouth, upper airway and lung vagal afferent input. This suggests that inspiratory occlusion can elicit cortical activity with activation of inspiratory pump mechanoreceptors.

  • Cerebral cortex
  • inspiratory occlusion
  • respiratory muscles

When ventilation is obstructed, stimulated, challenged or attended to, these changes induce cognitive awareness of breathing. Cognitive awareness of the mechanical status of ventilation is essential for patient respiratory self-management and requires that respiratory-related afferent information be made available to regions of the cerebral cortex that permit conscious awareness of, and attention to, breathing. The respiratory-related evoked potential (RREP) is a unique measure of cerebral cortical activity elicited by breathing against a mechanical load. It provides quantification of both the initial arrival and processing of afferent information at the primary sensory cortex and its subsequent cognitive processing by other associative cortical areas. These neural processes result in patients orienting attention towards ventilation, fear, anxiety, sleep state and behaviour. Induced awareness of ventilation is of profound protective importance, alerting the patient to disrupted ventilation. Failure of cognitive awareness of respiratory mechanical changes is one cause of life-threatening asthmatic attacks 1–3. It is likely that the RREP is mediated by multiple respiratory mechanoreceptor populations; however, the afferents mediating the RREP remain unknown.

The RREP has been elicited via inspiratory occlusion, inspiratory loads and negative pressures applied during an inspiration 4–8. The RREP has been recorded from scalp electrodes in humans and subdural electrodes in lambs 4, 9. The short-latency P1 peak of the RREP is generated in the somatosensory cortex 9, 10. The P1 peak of the RREP can be elicited via inspiratory occlusion in humans with lung vagal denervation 8. However, it is not known whether inspiratory occlusion, in humans who have undergone double lung transplantation (DLT; and lung denervation) and are respiring via a tracheostomy (upper airway bypass), elicits the RREP. The long-latency peak of the RREP associated with attention, P300, has also been reported in normal subjects and patients who have undergone DLT 11–14. The respiratory P300 amplitude is greatest when the subject attends to the occlusion 15. However, it is not known whether the P300 is present in patients who have had their upper airway bypassed.

Candidates for DLT occasionally require the placement of a tracheostomy prior to lung transplantation. Following DLT, the tracheostomy is closed and the patient respires normally through their mouth and upper airways. The transplanted lung mechanics are normal and respiratory muscle function is also normal 11, 16. Two adult DLT patients who were 1.5 and 3 months post-DLT and had a capped tracheostomy in place were studied. The patients normally respired via their mouth. When respiring through the cuffed tracheostomy tube, the upper airways were not exposed to respiratory mechanical changes and the lungs were deafferented by the DLT. It was hypothesised that the P1 and P300 peaks of the RREP could be recorded in patients with mouth breathing and upper airways intact (lung deafferented) and also with tracheostomy breathing with upper airways bypassed (lung deafferented).

METHODS

Subjects

The Institutional Review Board of the University of Florida (Gainesville, FL, USA) reviewed and approved the present study. The tracheostomised DLT patients were recruited from the University of Florida Health Science Center. Patient No. 1 was a female aged 31 yrs. The time elapsed since DLT surgery was 3 months. The patient was on a medical regimen of Imuran, prednisone, Torpal, Previset, cyclosporin and Septra. The patient showed no evidence of rejection or neurological disease. Patient No. 2 was a male aged 45 yrs and was 1.5 months post-DLT. This was the patient’s second DLT. The patient was on a medical regimen of Imuran, Prograf, prednisone, Septra, Lopressor, insulin and Humalen. The patient showed no evidence of rejection or neurological disease. The patients provided informed consent prior to participating in the present study.

Nine healthy nonsmoking control subjects were tested (three males and six females). The subjects were in good general health based on their self-reported medical history of no chronic or acute neurological or respiratory disease. The subjects refrained from consuming alcohol and caffeinated beverages for ≥24 h before the study. Each subject was brought to the laboratory and informed of the nature of the study. The general nature of the experiment was described and their consent obtained.

Procedures

The methods used in the present study have been described previously 8. The subjects were seated with their back, neck and head supported. Electroencephalographic (EEG) activity was recorded at scalp positions F3, F4, C3’, C4’ and Pz referenced to the joined ear lobes. Electrodes were placed over the lateral edge of the eye for recording a vertical electro-oculogram. The impedance levels were maintained below 5 kΩ. EEG activity was recorded (Model 12, Neurodata Acquisition System; Grass Instruments, Quincy, MA, USA), band-pass filtered (0.3–1 kHz), amplified and led into a computer system (Model 1401; Cambridge Electronic Design, Cambridge, UK).

The patients respired through a non-rebreathing valve with the inspiratory port connected to an occlusion valve. Each inspiratory interruption occlusion was separated by two to six unoccluded breaths. There were four RREP experimental conditions: 1) mouth breathing ignore trial; 2) mouth breathing attend trial; 3) tracheostomy breathing attend trial; and 4) tracheostomy breathing ignore trial. The control subjects respired through the same apparatus and were presented with the same protocol except that only the mouth ignore and mouth attend occlusion trials were presented.

Data analysis

The EEG activity was averaged for each RREP trial as described previously 8. The presence, latency and amplitude of RREP components Nf, P1, N1 and P300 were determined from the averaged EEG traces. The nomenclature for the peaks is based on previous RREP reports 11, 15.

RESULTS

The Nf peak was observed in the frontal region and the P1 and N1 peaks in the somatosensory region in the mouth breathing ignore trial (fig. 1a⇓, 2a⇓) and the tracheostomy breathing ignore trial (fig. 1b⇓, 2b⇓). The RREP for ignore breathing was similar to that of control subjects (fig. 3⇓).

Fig. 1—
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1—

a, b) Respiratory-related evoked potentials and c, d) mouth pressures (Pm) elicited during ignore breathing trials for double lung transplantation subject No. 1. a, c) mouth breathing and b, d) tracheostomy breathing (trace 1: A1A2-F3; trace 2: A1A2-Pz). In the mouth breathing ignore trial, positive voltage is reduced. The Nf peak is indicated. The P1 and N1 peaks were observed in the Pz trace similar to the C3’ and C4’ recordings. EEG: electroencephalography.

Fig. 2—
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 2—

a, b) Respiratory-related evoked potentials and c, d) averaged mouth pressures (Pm) elicited during ignore breathing trials in double lung transplantation subject No. 2. a, c) mouth breathing and b, d) tracheostomy breathing (trace 1: A1A2-F3; trace 2: A1A2-Pz). In the mouth breathing ignore trial, positive voltage is reduced. The Nf peak is indicated. The P1 and N1 peaks were observed in the Pz trace similar to the C3’ and C4’ recordings. EEG: electroencephalography.

Fig. 3—
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 3—

a) Respiratory-related evoked potentials (trace 1: A1A2-F3 average ignore; trace 2: A1A2-Pz ignore; trace 3: A1A2-Pz attend), and b) averaged mouth pressures (Pm; -----: attend breathing; ––––: ignore breathing) elicited during ignore and attend mouth breathing trials in a control subject. Trace 1 demonstrates the Nf peak in the frontal region represented by the F3 recording site and trace 2 the P1 and N1 peaks observed in the Pz trace, which was similar to the C3’ and C4’ recordings. Trace 3 shows the P300 peak at the Pz recording site. EEG: electroencephalography.

The latencies between mouth and tracheostomy breathing were similar for all three peaks (table 1⇓). The tracheostomy breathing peak amplitudes were smaller than for mouth breathing (table 1⇓). The Nf, P1 and N1 peak amplitudes and latencies of the two patients were similar to those of the control subjects (table 1⇓).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1—

Early respiratory-related evoked potential peaks during ignore breathing trials

The P300 peak was observed in the Pz electrode recording of the mouth and tracheostomy attend trials (figures 4⇓ and 5⇓). The RREP for attend breathing was similar to that of control subjects (fig. 3⇑).

Fig. 4—
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 4—

a) Respiratory-related evoked potentials (trace 1: mouth breathing; trace 2: tracheostomy breathing (both A1A2-Pz)), and b) averaged mouth pressures (Pm; -----: mouth breathing; ––––: tracheostomy breathing) elicited during attend breathing trials for double lung transplantation subject No. 1. The averaged electroencephalographic (EEG) activity is from the same subject as in figure 1⇑. In the mouth breathing attend trial, positive voltage is reduced. The P300 peak is indicated.

Fig. 5—
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 5—

Respiratory-related evoked potentials elicited during attend breathing trials in double lung transplantation subject No. 2 (trace 1: mouth breathing; trace 2: tracheostomy breathing (both A1A2-Pz)). The averaged electroencephalographic (EEG) activity is from the same subject as in figure 2⇑. Positive voltage is reduced. The P300 peak is indicated.

The attend P300 latencies were similar with mouth and tracheostomy breathing (table 2⇓). The mouth-breathing P300 amplitude was greater than that with tracheostomy breathing (table 2⇓). The P300 peak amplitudes and latencies for the two patients were similar to those of the control subjects (table 2⇓).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2—

P300 respiratory-related evoked potential peak

Maximum mouth pressure was more negative during mouth breathing than during tracheostomy breathing (figures 4⇑ and 5⇑). The time to maximum mouth pressure change for tracheostomy breathing was approximately half the latency of mouth breathing (table 2⇑). The maximum changes in mouth pressure for the two patients were similar to those of the control subjects (table 2⇑). The time to maximum mouth pressure was longer for the control subjects, with mouth pressure maximum change occurring at the end of the occlusion (table 2⇑).

DISCUSSION

The results from the present study demonstrate that the RREPs elicited by inspiratory occlusion are recorded breathing through either the mouth or the tracheostomy alone. The present patients were unique. Normally, DLT transplant patients have their tracheostomy closed within 2 weeks after surgery. The institutional review board approved protocol required a minimum of 30 days’ recovery from DLT surgery before patients were enrolled in the RREP protocol. Thus it was difficult to match both patient and study criteria. At the time of testing, the patients were not hospitalised and were able to breathe normally. Both patients were participating in vigorous endurance and strength training rehabilitation. The study protocol did not influence the medical decision as to retention or removal of the tracheostomy. The RREP was present under both ventilatory conditions, demonstrating that at least one population of inspiratory-occlusion-activated mechanoreceptors remained intact after DLT surgery and while patients respired through their tracheostomy.

The Nf, P1, N1 and P300 RREP components were identified in the DLT tracheostomy patients in the present study and were similar to those of the control subjects. The P1 RREP component is believed to reflect the arrival of sensory information in the primary sensory area 4, 10. Therefore, the fact that these peaks are present with subjects respiring through their tracheostomy demonstrates that inspiratory-occlusion-related respiratory mechanoreceptors activate the somatosensory cortex.

The P300 peak was identified in both mouth and tracheostomy trials, with similar patterns to those previously found in DLT patients 11 and control subjects. These results, during both ignored and attended trials, are consistent with previous findings regarding the effect of attention on the P300 peak of the RREP 15. The presence of the Nf, P1, N1 and P300 peaks of the RREP during tracheostomy breathing demonstrates that the RREP is present when lung and upper airway afferents are not stimulated by the inspiratory occlusion.

Inspiratory pump mechanoreceptors are the most likely afferents to provide sensory information activated by inspiratory occlusion. Studies in animals have demonstrated somatosensory cortical-evoked potentials elicited by stimulating the phrenic nerve and intercostal muscle afferents 17, 18. Therefore, the respiratory muscles possess the afferent substrate and central pathways to provide one source of the RREP, and these mechanoreceptors remain intact in the present patients breathing through their tracheostomy. This supports the hypothesis that occlusion-related loading of the inspiratory muscles activates muscle mechanoreceptors that can elicit the RREP.

The conclusion of the present study that the RREP is elicited by multiple respiratory mechanoreceptor modalities is consistent with the study of Donzel-Raynaud et al. 19. Donzel-Raynaud et al. 19 recorded the RREP under ignore conditions using a vertex reference (Cz) in eight patients, four with high cervical spinal lesions receiving phrenic nerve pacing and four with chronic respiratory failure requiring tracheotomy. They found that loss of inspiratory muscle function (quadriplegic) or decreased inspiratory muscle function, to the point of requiring a tracheostomy and night-time external ventilatory support, resulted in the absence of the RREP with bypass of the mouth. Inclusion of the mouth resulted in a normal RREP in only two of the eight patients. The patients in the present study were markedly different. The subjects in the present study showed normal pulmonary mechanics, respiratory muscle innervation and inspiratory-force-generating capacity compared with control subjects. They did not require external ventilatory support, could exercise without external ventilatory support and did not normally respire via their tracheostomy. Unlike the quadriplegic patients, the only respiratory denervation in the present patients involved lung vagal afferents. In addition, the present study used a noncephalic reference and two attentional states that permitted recording of the P300 peak. The vertex reference does not permit observation of the frontal Nf 20 nor the P300 peaks; thus these peaks, present during tracheostomy breathing in the present study, could not be observed in the study of Donzel-Raynaud et al. 19. The RREP P1 peak during tracheostomy breathing in the present study was recorded under significantly different conditions; the inspiratory muscles were normal and exclusion of mouth mechanoreceptors resulted in a reduced and observable RREP. It has also been reported that increased background inspiratory load reduces the amplitude and even abolishes the resistive-load-elicited RREP in normal subjects 21. The nonquadriplegic patients have a very high background load, and this may explain why the RREP was not observed in the reduced afferent (tracheostomy) condition. Thus there are major differences in the baseline condition of both groups of patients and RREP recording that may explain the inability of Donzel-Raynaud et al. 19 to observe the RREP with tracheostomy breathing. The results of these two studies are consistent with the present study’s conclusion that multiple afferent inputs into the cerebral cortex elicit the RREP. The present study demonstrates that the RREP can be elicited by inspiratory-obstruction-mediated activation in inspiratory pump afferents but with reduced amplitude. The results of Donzel-Raynaud et al. 19 support this by not observing the RREP during tracheostomy breathing in patients with paralysed inspiratory muscles or background inspiratory loads of sufficient magnitude to require external ventilatory support. Thus these two studies support contributions of the inspiratory muscle and upper airway mechanoreceptors in eliciting the RREP. This is also consistent with the report that airway anaesthesia does not alter the RREP 22. Hence, multiple sources of afferent activity that can elicit the RREP are broadly distributed throughout the respiratory system 4, 6, 7, 23, 24. The present study is consistent with these results and demonstrates that inspiratory occlusion can activate one of those input sources, mechanoreceptors in the respiratory pump, and elicit the RREP.

The results of the present study suggest that both upper airway afferents and respiratory muscle afferents may be involved in cognitive processing of respiratory information related to inspiration against mechanical loads. Thus, the central nervous system has multiple afferent populations that provide mechanical information on respiratory loaded breathing to the cerebral cortex. The input from multiple mechanosensory modalities is essential for patients to self-monitor their ventilatory status, localise the origin of their pulmonary dysfunction and motivate behaviour for treatment.

  • Received August 15, 2005.
  • Accepted April 6, 2006.
  • © ERS Journals Ltd

References

  1. ↵
    Davenport PW, Cruz M, Stecenko A, Kifle Y. Respiratory related evoked potentials in children with life-threatening asthma. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;161:1830–1835.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  2. Davenport PW, Kifle Y. Inspiratory resistive load detection in children with life-threatening asthma. Pediatr Pulmonol 2001;32:44–48.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  3. ↵
    Kifle Y, Seng V, Davenport PW. Magnitude estimation of inspiratory resistive loads in children with life-threatening asthma. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997;156:1530–1535.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  4. ↵
    Davenport PW, Friedman WA, Thompson FJ, Franzen O. Respiratory-related cortical evoked potentials in humans. J Appl Physiol 1986;60:1843–1848.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. Strobel RJ, Daubenspeck JA. Early and late respiratory-related cortical potentials evoked by pressure pulse stimuli in humans. J Appl Physiol 1993;74:1484–1491.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    Daubenspeck JA, Harold LM, Akay M. Contribution of supraglottal mechanoreceptor afferents to respiratory-related evoked potentials in humans. J Appl Physiol 2000;88:291–299.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    Grippo A, Carrai R, Romagnoli I, Pino F, Sanna A. Respiratory-related evoked potential and upper airway transmural pressure change by using the negative expiratory pressure (NEP) device. Clin Neurophysiol 2003;114:636–642.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  8. ↵
    Knafelc M, Davenport PW. Relationship between resistive loads and P1 peak of respiratory-related evoked potential. J Appl Physiol 1997;83:918–926.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    Davenport PW, Hutchison AA. Cerebral cortical respiratory-related evoked potentials elicited by inspiratory occlusion in lambs. J Appl Physiol 2001;93:31–36.
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    Logie ST, Colrain IM, Webster KE. Source dipole analysis of the early components of the RREP. Brain Topogr 1998;11:153–164.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  11. ↵
    Zhao W, Martin AD, Davenport PW. Respiratory-related evoked potentials elicited by inspiratory occlusions in double-lung transplant recipients. J Appl Physiol 2002;93:894–902.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. Gora J, Trinder J, Pierce R, Colrain IM. Evidence of a sleep-specific blunted cortical response to inspiratory occlusions in mild obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002;166:1225–1234.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  13. Harver A, Squires NK, Bloch-Salisbury E, Katkin ES. Event-related potentials to airway occlusion in young and old subjects. Psychophysiology 1995;32:121–129.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  14. ↵
    Colrain IM, Adey S, Webster KE. : Stimulus probability and P3 in the respiratory-related evoked potential (RREP). Psychophysiology 1998; 35: S25
  15. ↵
    Webster KE, Colrain IM. The respiratory-related evoked potential: effects of attention and occlusion duration. Psychophysiology 2000;37:310–318.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  16. ↵
    Pellegrino R, Rodarte JR, Frost AE, Reid MB. Breathing by double-lung recipients during exercise: response to expiratory threshold loading. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998;157:106–110.
  17. ↵
    Davenport PW, Thompson FJ, Reep RL, Freed AN. Projection of phrenic nerve afferents to the cat sensorimotor cortex. Brain Res 1985;328:150–153.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  18. ↵
    Davenport PW, Shannon R, Mercak A, Reep RL, Lindsey BG. Cerebral cortical evoked potentials elicited by cat intercostal muscle mechanoreceptors. J Appl Physiol 1993;74:799–804.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. ↵
    Donzel-Raynaud C, Straus C, Bezzi M, et al. Upper airway afferents are sufficient to evoke the early components of respiratory-related cortical potentials in humans. J Appl Physiol 2004;97:1874–1879.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. ↵
    Davenport PW, Colrain I, Hill PM. Scalp topography of the short-latency components of the respiratory-related evoked potential in children. J Appl Physiol 1996;80:1785–1791.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. ↵
    Chou Y-L, Davenport PW. Respiratory related evoked potential amplitude decreases with elevated background airway resistance in healthy adults. Program Number 200.11. Abstract Viewer/Itinerary Planner. Washington, DC, Society for Neuroscience, 2004
  22. ↵
    Redolfi S, Raux M, Donzel-Raynaud C, et al. Effects of upper airway anaesthesia on respiratory-related evoked potentials in humans. Eur Respir J 2005;26:1097–1103.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. ↵
    Gandevia SC, Macefield G. Projection of low-threshold afferents from human intercostal muscles to the cerebral cortex. Respir Physiol 1989;77:203–214.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  24. ↵
    Zifko UA, Young BG, Remtulla H, Bolton CF. Somatosensory evoked potentials of the phrenic nerve. Muscle Nerve 1995;18:1487–1489.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
PreviousNext
Back to top
View this article with LENS
Vol 28 Issue 2 Table of Contents
European Respiratory Journal: 28 (2)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Respiratory-related evoked potential elicited in tracheostomised lung transplant patients
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Citation Tools
Respiratory-related evoked potential elicited in tracheostomised lung transplant patients
P. W. Davenport, A. D. Martin, Y-L. Chou, S. Alexander-Miller
European Respiratory Journal Aug 2006, 28 (2) 391-396; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.06.00095005

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Respiratory-related evoked potential elicited in tracheostomised lung transplant patients
P. W. Davenport, A. D. Martin, Y-L. Chou, S. Alexander-Miller
European Respiratory Journal Aug 2006, 28 (2) 391-396; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.06.00095005
Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

  • Reversing the tuberculosis upwards trend: a success story in Romania
  • Value of cancer antigen 125 for diagnosis of pleural endometriosis in females with recurrent pneumothorax
  • Recombinant human DNase nebulisation in children with cystic fibrosis: before bedtime or after waking up?
Show more Original Articles: Short report

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About the ERJ

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • Podcasts
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN:  0903-1936
Online ISSN: 1399-3003

Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society