Sensitivity of motor unit potential analysis in facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy

Muscle and Nerve

Volumn 34, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 451-456

  Podnar, Simon ^a   Zidar, Janez ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTRE LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

Author keywords

Biceps brachii; Facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy; Motor unit potential; Quantitative electromyography; Sensitivity; Vastus lateralis

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AMPLITUDE MODULATION; ARTICLE; BICEPS BRACHII MUSCLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSIS RELATED GROUP; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURE; ELBOW FLEXION; ELECTROMYOGRAPHY; FACIOSCAPULOHUMERAL MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; KNEE; MALE; MOLECULAR GENETICS; MOTOR UNIT POTENTIAL; MUSCLE STRENGTH; MUSCLE WEAKNESS; MYOPATHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; THICKNESS; TIME PERCEPTION; VASTUS LATERALIS MUSCLE;

ACTION POTENTIALS; ADULT; AGED; ELECTROMYOGRAPHY; ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTOR NEURONS; MUSCLE FIBERS; MUSCLE, SKELETAL; MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY, FACIOSCAPULOHUMERAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 33749406669     PISSN: 0148639X     EISSN: 10974598     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/mus.20613     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Barkhaus PE, Nandedkar SD, Sanders DB. Quantitative EMG in inflammatory myopathy. Muscle Nerve 1990;13:247-253.
2. Barkhaus PE, Periquet MI, Nandedkar SD. Quantitative electrophysiologic studies in sporadic inclusion body myositis. Muscle Nerve 1999;22:480-487.
3. Bischoff C, Stalberg E, Falck B, Eeg-Olofsson KE. Reference values of motor unit action potentials obtained with multi-MUAP analysis. Muscle Nerve 1994;17:842-851.
4. Bradley WG, Jones MZ, Mussini JM, Fawcett PR. Becker-type muscular dystrophy. Muscle Nerve 1978;1:111-132.
5. Brannagan TH, Hays AP, Lange DJ, Trojaborg W. The role of quantitative electromyography in inclusion body myositis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1997;63:776-779.
6. Buchthal F. An introduction to electromyography. Oslo: J.W. Capelen; 1957.
7. Buchthal F, Kamieniecka Z. The diagnostic yield of quantified electromyography and quantified muscle biopsy in neuromuscular disorders. Muscle Nerve 1982;5:265-280.
8. Fawcett PRW, Kennett RP, Schofield IS, Johnson MA. A neurophysiological investigation of the facio-scapulo-humeral (FSH) syndrome. J Neurol Sci 1990;98(suppl):195.
9. Furukawa T, Toyokura Y. Chronic spinal muscular atrophy of facioscapulohumeral type. J Med Genet 1976;13:285-289.
10. Nandedkar SD, Barkhaus PE, Sanders DB, Stalberg EV. Analysis of amplitude and area of concentric needle EMG motor unit action potentials. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1988;69:561-567.
11. Nandedkar SD, Sanders DB, Stalberg EV, Andreassen S. Simulation of concentric needle EMG motor unit action potentials. Muscle Nerve 1988;11:151-159.
12. Nandedkar SD, Sanders DB. Simulation of myopathie motor unit action potentials. Muscle Nerve 1989;12:197-202.
13. Nandedkar SD, Barkhaus PE, Charles A. Multi-motor unit action potential analysis (MMA). Muscle Nerve 1995;18:1155-1166.
14. Padberg GW, Lunt PW, Koch M, Fardeau M. Diagnostic criteria for facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy. Neuromuscul Disord 1991;1:231-234.
15. Podnar S. Criteria for neuropathic abnormality in quantitative anal sphincter electromyography. Muscle Nerve 2004;30:596-601.
16. Podnar S. Comparison of different outlier criteria in quantitative anal sphincter electromyography. Clin Neurophysiol 2005;116:1840-1845.
17. Podnar S, Mrkaic M. Predictive power of motor unit potential parameters in anal sphincter electromyography. Muscle Nerve 2002;26:389-394.
18. Podnar S, Vodusek DB. Standardization of anal sphincter electromyography: utility of motor unit potential parameters. Muscle Nerve 2001;24:946-951.
19. Podnar S, Vodusek DB, Stalberg E. Comparison of quantitative techniques in anal sphincter electromyography. Muscle Nerve 2002;25:83-92.
20. Podnar S, Zalewska E, Hausmanowa-Petrusewicz I. Evaluation of the complexity of motor unit potentials in anal sphincter electromyography. Clin Neurophysiol 2005;116:948-956.
21. Sonoo M, Stalberg 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.
22. Stalberg E, Andreassen S, Falck B, Lang H, Rosenfalck A, Trojaborg W. Quantitative analysis of individual motor unit potentials: a proposition for standardized terminology and criteria for measurement. J Clin Neurophysiol 1986;3:313-348.
23. Stalberg E, Bischoff C, Falck B. Outliers, a way to detect abnormality in quantitative EMG. Muscle Nerve 1994;17:392-399.
24. Stalberg E, Falck B, Sonoo M, Stalberg S, Astrom M. Multi-MUP EMG analysis-a two year experience in daily clinical work. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1995;97:145-154.
25. Stewart CR, Nandedkar SD, Massey JM, Gilchrist JM, Barkhaus PE, Sanders DB. Evaluation of an automatic method of measuring features of motor unit action potentials. Muscle Nerve 1989;12:141-148.
26. Tupler R, Gabellini D. Molecular basis of facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy. Cell Mol Life Sci 2004;61:557-566.
27. Uncini A, Lange DJ, Lovelace RE, Solomon M, Hays AP. Long-duration polyphasic motor unit potentials in myopathies: a quantitative study with pathological correlation. Muscle Nerve 1990;13:263-267.
28. Wijmenga C, Hewitt JE, Sandkuijl LA, Clark LN, Wright TJ, Dauwerse HG, et al. Chromosome 4q DNA rearrangements associated with facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy. Nat Genet 1992;2:26-30.