Zwarts M J
Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, University Hospital, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1989 Dec;73(6):544-8. doi: 10.1016/0013-4694(89)90263-0.
Two techniques to measure muscle fiber conduction velocity (MFCV) were compared. First, muscle fibers of biceps muscle were directly stimulated with needle electrodes, and the latency of the evoked muscle fiber action potentials was measured at a distance of 5 cm. Subsequently, the MFCV was measured at the same place with surface electrodes using the cross-correlation method. Fourteen controls were studied and illustrative results of the measurements of 6 myopathy patients are given. A clear correlation between the mean values of the two methods was found. The surface EMG technique resulted in a systematically higher MFCV (mean 1.0 m/sec); the variability of MFCV was much higher with the invasive technique. The reasons for these differences are discussed. MFCV measurements are shown to be of diagnostic value in some myopathies, for example myositis. In myopathies with a global reduction of the MFCV the two methods are of equal value; in some cases of longstanding myositis the needle method demonstrated some very slowly conducting fibers which were not detected with the surface method.
对两种测量肌纤维传导速度(MFCV)的技术进行了比较。首先,用针电极直接刺激肱二头肌的肌纤维,并在5厘米的距离处测量诱发的肌纤维动作电位的潜伏期。随后,使用互相关方法在同一位置用表面电极测量MFCV。研究了14名对照者,并给出了6名肌病患者测量的说明性结果。发现两种方法的平均值之间存在明显的相关性。表面肌电图技术导致MFCV系统地更高(平均1.0米/秒);侵入性技术的MFCV变异性更高。讨论了这些差异的原因。MFCV测量在某些肌病中显示出诊断价值,例如肌炎。在MFCV整体降低的肌病中,两种方法具有同等价值;在一些长期肌炎病例中,针电极方法显示出一些传导非常缓慢的纤维,而表面电极方法未检测到这些纤维。