Suppr超能文献

皮质刺激诱发的膈肌活动:表面电极与食管电极对比

Diaphragmatic activity induced by cortical stimulation: surface versus esophageal electrodes.

作者信息

Gea J, Espadaler J M, Guiu R, Aran X, Seoane L, Broquetas J M

机构信息

Servei de Pneumologia i Neurofisiologia, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain.

出版信息

J Appl Physiol (1985). 1993 Feb;74(2):655-8. doi: 10.1152/jappl.1993.74.2.655.

Abstract

Evoked responses of the diaphragm can be induced by magnetic cortical stimulation and recorded by either surface or esophageal electrodes. The former recording system is tolerated better by the patient but has potential problems with the specificity of the diaphragmatic signal. This study compares the responses of the diaphragm to cortical stimulation that were recorded simultaneously with surface and esophageal electrodes on seven patients (61 +/- 4 yr) with chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases. Stimuli were delivered in three ventilatory conditions: at baseline, during deep breathing, and during voluntary panting. No differences were observed between results recorded by surface and esophageal electrodes [amplitude of the compound motor of the action potential (CMAP), 0.8 +/- 0.1 vs. 0.8 +/- 0.1 mV, NS; latency, 13.1 +/- 0.4 vs. 12.6 +/- 0.5 ms, NS]. In addition, significant correlations were found (CMAP, r = 0.77, P < 0.001; latency, r = 0.71, P = 0.002). The concordance analysis, however, indicated some dissimilarity between the recordings of the electrodes (CMAP, R1 = 0.31; latency, R1 = 0.26). These differences may be due to the area of the muscle mainly recorded by each electrode and/or to the additional activity from other muscles recorded by surface electrodes. On the other hand, the diaphragmatic responses observed in these patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases were similar to those previously reported in healthy subjects.

摘要

磁皮层刺激可诱发膈肌的诱发反应,并可通过表面电极或食管电极进行记录。前一种记录系统患者耐受性更好,但膈肌信号的特异性存在潜在问题。本研究比较了7例(61±4岁)慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者在表面电极和食管电极同时记录下膈肌对皮层刺激的反应。刺激在三种通气条件下进行:基线时、深呼吸时和自主喘息时。表面电极和食管电极记录的结果之间未观察到差异[动作电位复合运动(CMAP)的幅度,0.8±0.1 vs. 0.8±0.1 mV,无显著性差异;潜伏期,13.1±0.4 vs. 12.6±0.5 ms,无显著性差异]。此外,发现存在显著相关性(CMAP,r = 0.77,P < 0.001;潜伏期,r = 0.71,P = 0.002)。然而,一致性分析表明电极记录之间存在一些差异(CMAP,R1 = 0.31;潜伏期,R1 = 0.26)。这些差异可能是由于每个电极主要记录的肌肉区域和/或表面电极记录的来自其他肌肉的额外活动所致。另一方面,这些慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者观察到的膈肌反应与先前在健康受试者中报道的反应相似。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验