Compound muscle action potential (CMAP) scan examination of paretic and contralateral muscles reveals motor unit alterations after stroke

Chen, Maoqi; Lu, Zhiyuan; Li, Xiaoyan; Zong, Ya; Xie, Qing; Li, Sheng; Zhou, Ping

doi:10.1007/s11427-022-2308-8

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…By contrast, compound muscle action potential (CMAP) scan aims to gradually activate/deactivate all motor units by applying hundreds of transcutaneous stimuli to the motor nerve across a wide range of intensities ( Blok et al, 2007 ). Compared with traditional MUNE methods, CMAP scan is less biased to the sampling of motor units, and various methods have been developed to process CMAP scan for examination of neuromuscular disorders ( Sleutjes et al, 2014 ; Nandedkar et al, 2022 ; Chen et al, 2023a , b ; Lu et al, 2023b ). Of particular note, Bostock proposed a model-based MUNE algorithm named MScanFit, which estimates the number of motor units by fitting the detailed stimulus–response curve recorded from a CMAP scan ( Bostock, 2016 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of surface electrode recording area on compound muscle action potential scan processing for motor unit number estimation

Zhang,

Lu,

Gong

et al. 2024

Front. Neurosci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionMScanFit is a model-based algorithm for motor unit number estimation (MUNE) from compound muscle action potential (CMAP) scan data. It is a clinically applicable tool because of its quick and automatic implementation. Electrodes with different recording areas were employed to record CMAP scan data in existing studies. However, the effect of electrode recording area on MScanFit MUNE and other CMAP scan parameters has not been studied.MethodsCMAP scan was performed on the abductor pollicis brevis muscle of both hands on 14 healthy subjects using three different electrodes with recording areas of 10 mm × 10 mm, 11 mm × 14 mm, and 22 mm × 26 mm, respectively. Motor unit number was estimated using MScanFit for each CMAP scan. Two motor unit number index parameters, i.e., D50 and step index (STEPIX), were also derived from the CMAP scan data.ResultsNo significant difference in D50, STEPIX, and MScanFit MUNE was observed across three different electrode recording areas, although the amplitude of CMAP decreased significantly when a larger electrode was used. Intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.792 and 0.782 were obtained for MScanFit MUNE and STEPIX, respectively.DiscussionCompared with CMAP amplitude, D50, STEPIX, and MScanFit MUNE are less sensitive to variation in electrode recording area. However, the repeatability of MScanFit MUNE could be compromised by the inconsistency in the electrode recording area.

show abstract