An electrophysiological study was carried out on four patients with unilateral diaphragmatic paralysis. Whereas neurogenic involvement of the paralysed hemidiaphragm was roughly similar in all cases, neurogenic patterns could be detected in the normally moving controlateral hemidiaphragm in three cases, and the degree of involvement could be correlated with the respiratory state of the patients. EMG also showed that the neuropathic process affected the limb muscles. Thus unilateral diaphragmatic paralysis may be, at least in some cases, the localised expression of a more diffuse neuropathy, perhaps a peculiar form of neuralgic amyotrophy. Diaphragmatic paralysis has been attributed to multiple causes,"2 the most common being a tumour affecting the phrenic nerve. In some cases, however, the cause remains unknown and the paralysis is then called idiopathic.' [3][4][5] Bilateral diaphragmatic paralysis induces dyspnoea on exertion and supine position,2 whereas unilateral diaphragmatic paralysis may be asymptomatic and discovered only in routine chest x ray pictures. We carried out an electrophysiological study on four patients suffering from apparently unilateral idiopathic diaphragmatic paralysis. The paralysis was both isolated and complete on the chest x ray picture in all of the patients, although the respiratory complaints differed from case to case. Our aim was to determine whether the results of the electrophysiological tests could explain this disparity and investigate the mechanism of the paralysis.
Patients and methods ELECTROPHYSIOLOGICAL METHODSThe tests were performed with MS6 (Medelec) or Viking (Nicolet) EMG apparatus. The patients were in a supine position. To record EMG a 7 cm long coaxial needle was inserted below the xiphoid appendix through the rectus abdominus and pushed along the posterior border of the stemum up to the sternal insertions of the right or left hemidiaphragm (RHD and LHD). The needle was left in place and conduction along the phrenic nerve was measured by stimulating the nerve with a surface electrode located at the lateral edge of the sternocleidomastoid. The latencies of the compound muscle action potential (CMAP) from the RHD and LHD after right and left phrenic nerve stimulation respectively, were measured and compared (normal range 6-8 ms). When the EMG showed motor unit potentials (MUPs) during deep inspiration in the paralysed HD but no CMAP after ipsilateral phrenic nerve stimulation, the controlateral phrenic nerve was stimulated to look for a possible crossed innervation. When we failed to record activity from the diaphragm with this method the coaxial needle was inserted under radioscopic control on the middle axillary line, between the seventh and eighth intercostal spaces and pushed up to the costal insertion of the diaphragm.6The CMAP after phrenic nerve stimulation was recorded as before. During these investigations no complications were observed, and coaxial needles gave information on MUPs and interference pattern that could not be obtained from surface ...