Motor unit number of the first dorsal interosseous muscle estimated from CMAP scan with different pulse widths and steps

Zong, Ya; Lu, Zhiyuan; Li-ning, Zhang; Li, Xiaoyan; Zhou, Ping

doi:10.1088/1741-2552/ab57cc

Cited by 12 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The test–retest analysis indicates good measurement reliability for CMAP amplitude and excellent measurement reliability for MScanFit MUNE, suggesting that MScanFit MUNE might be less dependent of CMAP amplitude, compared with traditional MUNE methods. Interestingly, we found the estimated motor unit number in this study was much lower compared with previous MUNE studies of different hand muscles, such as the first dorsal interosseous, abductor pollicis brevis, and abductor digiti minimi muscles, which have several times of the estimated motor unit number of the second lumbrical muscle ( Higashihara et al, 2020 ; Zong et al, 2020 ). Compared with the interosseous muscle that has a similar function involved in fine motor control of the hand, the lumbrical is a relatively small size muscle with small cross-sectional area and weak muscle strength ( Wang et al, 2014 ).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 89%

“…In contrast to most MUNE approaches relying on mean motor unit size estimation from a small sample of motor units, MScanFit MUNE fits a model to an experimental CMAP scan curve which can provide information about full range motor unit activations of a muscle (Bostock, 2016). Using a protocol recommended in previous studies (500 steps, 2 Hz stimulus frequency, 100 ms pulse duration; Maathuis et al, 2012;Zong et al, 2020), the CMAP scan recording for MScanFit could also be completed on average within several minutes. Therefore, CMAP scan and MScanFit are quick to implement once the required specific hardware and software setups are available.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is reflected by the estimated motor unit number. In contrast, the first dorsal interosseous muscle was estimated to have 2 to 3 times motor unit number of the second lumbrical muscle ( Zong et al, 2020 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Motor Unit Number Estimation of the Second Lumbrical Muscle in Human Hand

Zong

Lu²,

Chen³

et al. 2022

Front. Physiol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The number of motor units of the lumbrical muscles in human hand has not been explored. The objective of this study was to fill this gap by estimating the number of motor units in the second lumbrical muscle. Compound muscle action potential scan of the second lumbrical muscle was performed in 12 healthy subjects, with 10 of them being tested on two separate occasions. Motor unit number estimation (MUNE) was derived from the MScanFit program. The average MUNE of the second lumbrical muscle was 41.6 ± 2.1 (mean ± standard error) from 12 subjects in the first test, and 42.0 ± 2.2 from 10 of the 12 subjects in the retest, demonstrating excellent measurement reliability. Findings of the study provide novel information about the motor unit number of the second lumbrical muscle in human hand. The relatively low motor unit number in the muscle can facilitate motor unit investigations, especially at high level muscle activation.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Motor Unit Number Estimation of the Second Lumbrical Muscle in Human Hand

Zong

Lu²,

Chen³

et al. 2022

Front. Physiol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This difference is likely to impact the fitting of the MScan that relies on threshold variability for MUNE estimation. 15 Previous studies evaluating the reliability of MScanFit MUNE on distal (first dorsal interosseous, abductor hallucis) and facial muscles reported higher ICC and lower SEMeas% compared to our results. 5,8,16 This difference may have arisen from several methodological issues related to CMAP measurements.…”

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 66%

“…The ground electrode was positioned between the stimulating and recording electrodes. Figure S1 illustrates the placement of the electrodes. All recordings were performed by H.C.A.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimating the motor unit number of the flexor carpi ulnaris muscle with MScanFit MUNE

Alaydın

Turkmen²,

Boran

et al. 2022

Muscle and Nerve

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction/Aims: MScanFit motor unit number estimation (MUNE) is a promising method for motor unit estimation and is reported to have good reliability in distal and small muscles. In this study, we investigated the reliability of MScanFit MUNE in a proximal forearm muscle, the flexor carpi ulnaris.Methods: Twenty healthy volunteers were included in this study, and 15 participants were re-evaluated in a second session. The ulnar nerve was stimulated at the elbow and a compound muscle action potential (CMAP) scan from the flexor carpi ulnaris (FCU) muscle was recorded from each arm. CMAP, MUNE, and other motor unit parameters were obtained. Reproducibility was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Results:The average MUNE from 40 FCU muscles was 90.9 (standard deviation: 16.4). MScanFit MUNE and CMAP were not significantly different between the dominant and non-dominant sides. The ICC indicated good reliability between sessions for each side (0.81 and 0.8, respectively). Discussion: Our results indicate that MScanFit MUNE is a feasible method with good reproducibility for MUNE of the FCU muscle.

show abstract

F wave analysis based on the compound muscle action potential scan

Li,

Chen,

Barkhaus

et al. 2024

Muscle and Nerve

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction/AimsConventional F wave analysis involves a relatively uniform physiological environment induced by supramaximal stimulations. The F wave characteristics in a dynamic physiological condition, however, are rarely investigated. This study aimed to improve understanding of F wave properties in the more dynamic process by introducing a novel method to analyze F waves based on the compound muscle action potential (CMAP) scan technique.MethodsTwenty four healthy subjects participated in the study. The CMAP scan was applied to record muscle responses in the abductor pollicis brevis (APB) and abductor digiti minimi (ADM) muscles, respectively. F wave characteristics including mean F wave amplitude and latency (F‐M latency), persistence and activating threshold were quantified.ResultsAn average of 200 F waves per muscle were obtained from the CMAP scan recording. Weak to moderate correlations between F wave amplitude and stimulating intensity were observed in most of the APB (19 muscles; r = 0.33 ± 0.14, all p < .05) and ADM (23 muscles, r = 0.46 ± 0.16, all p < .05) muscles. Significantly longer mean F latency and lower activating F‐threshold were found in the ADM muscles (F‐M latency: APB: 25.43 ± 2.39 ms, ADM: 26.15 ± 2.32 ms, p < .05; F‐threshold: APB: 7.68 ± 8.96% CMAP, ADM: 2.35 ± 2.42% CMAP, p < .05).DiscussionThis study introduces new features of F waves using the CMAP scan technique and identifies differences of F wave characteristics between the hand muscles. The CMAP scan based F waves analysis can be combined with the motor unit number estimation to assess functional alterations in motor neurons in neurological disorders.

show abstract

Motor unit number of the first dorsal interosseous muscle estimated from CMAP scan with different pulse widths and steps

Cited by 12 publications

References 74 publications

Motor Unit Number Estimation of the Second Lumbrical Muscle in Human Hand

Motor Unit Number Estimation of the Second Lumbrical Muscle in Human Hand

Estimating the motor unit number of the flexor carpi ulnaris muscle with MScanFit MUNE

F wave analysis based on the compound muscle action potential scan

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About