Motor unit sound in needle electromyography: Assessing normal and neuropathic units

Muscle and Nerve

Volumn 23, Issue 7, 2000, Pages 1076-1083

  Okajima, Yasutomo ^a   Tomita, Yutaka ^a   Ushijima, Ryosuke ^b   Chino, Naoichi ^c  

^a KEIO UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b NIHON KOHDEN CORPORATION   (Japan)

^c KEIO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

Author keywords

Computer simulation; Electromyography; Motor unit; Motor unit action potential; Sound

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DISPLAY SYSTEM; ELECTROMYOGRAPHY; FREQUENCY MODULATION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MOTOR UNIT POTENTIAL; NEUROPATHY; NORMAL HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SOUND INTENSITY;

ADULT; COMPUTER SIMULATION; ELECTROMYOGRAPHY; HUMANS; MEMBRANE POTENTIALS; MICROCOMPUTERS; MICROELECTRODES; MOTOR NEURONS; MUSCLE FIBERS; MUSCLE, SKELETAL; NEUROMUSCULAR DISEASES;

EID: 0033936886     PISSN: 0148639X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/1097-4598(200007)23:7<1076::AID-MUS10>3.0.CO;2-1     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Åstrom KE, Adams RD. Pathological reactions of the skeletal muscle fibre in man. In: Wlaton SJ, editor. Disorders of voluntary muscle. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1981. p 151-208.
2. Barkhaus PE, Nandedkar SD. On the selection of concentric needle electromyogram motor unit action potentials: is the rise time criterion too restrictive? Muscle Nerve 1996;19: 1554-1560.
3. Bennington JL, Krupp M. Morphometric analysis of muscle. In: Heffner RR, editor. Muscle pathology. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1984. p 43-72.
4. Bischoff C, Stålberg EV, Falck B, Eeg-Olofsson KE. Reference values of motor unit action potentials obtained with multi-MUP analysis. Muscle Nerve 1994;17:842-851.
5. Buchthal F. The general concept of the motor unit. Res Publ Assoc Res Nerv Ment Dis 1961;38:3-30.
6. Buchthal F, Erminio F, Rosenfalck P. Motor unit territory in different human muscles. Acta Physiol Scand 1959;45:72-87.
7. Dumitru D, King JC, Nandedkar SD. Concentric/monopolar needle electrode modeling: spatial recording territory and physiologic implications. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1997;105:370-378.
8. Dumitru D, King JC, Rogers WE. Motor unit action potential components and physiological duration. Muscle Nerve 1999; 22:733-741.
9. Gootzen TH, Vingerhoets DJ, Stegeman DF. A study of motor unit structure by means of scanning EMG. Muscle Nerve 1992;15:349-357.
10. Harris JD. Pitch discrimination. J Acoust Soc Am 1952;24: 750-755.
11. Hilton-Brown P, Nandedkar SD, Stålberg E. Simulation of fibre density in single-fibre electromyography and its relationship to macro-EMG. Med Biol Eng Comput 1985;23:541-546.
12. Hilton-Brown P, Stålberg E. Motor unit size in muscular dystrophy, a macro EMG and scanning EMG study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1983;46:996-1005.
13. International Federation of Societies for Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology. Recommendations for the practice of clinical neurophysiology. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1983, p. 143.
14. Kugelberg E, Edström L, Abbruzzese M. Mapping of motor units in experimentally reinnervated rat muscle. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1970;33:319-329.
15. Masuda T, DeLuca CJ. Recruitment threshold and muscle fiber conduction velocity of single motor units. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 1991;1:116-123.
16. Nandedkar SD, Dumitru D, King JC. Concentric needle electrode duration measurement and uptake area. Muscle Nerve 1997;20:1225-1228.
17. Nandedkar SB, Sigl JC, Kim YI, Stålberg EV. Radial decline of the extracellular action potential. Med Biol Eng Comput 1984;22:564-568.
18. Nandedkar SD, Stålberg E. Simulation of macro EMG motor unit potentials. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1983; 56:52-62.
19. Nandedkar SD, Stålberg E. Simulation of single muscle fibre action potentials. Med Biol Eng Comput 1983;21:158-165.
20. Nandedkar SD, Stålberg EV, Sanders D. Simulation techniques in electromyography. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1985; 32:775-785.
21. Okajima Y, Tomita V, Sasa H, Tanaka N, Kimura A, Chino N. The size index as a motor unit identifier in electromyography examined by numerical calculation. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 1999;9:201-208.
22. Robinson DW, Dadson RS. A re-determination of equal-loudness relations for pure tones. Br J Appl Physiol 1956;7: 166-181.
23. Sonoo M, Stålberg E. The ability of MUP parameters to discriminate between normal and neurogenic MUPs in concentric EMG: analysis of the MUP "thickness" and the proposal of "size index." Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1993;89: 291-303.
24. Stålberg E, Dioszeghy P. Scanning EMG in normal muscle and in neuro-muscular disorders. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1991;81:403-416.
25. Stevens SS. The attributes of tones. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1934;20:457-459.