Literature DB >> 23229776

Using vertebral movement and intact paraspinal muscles to determine the distribution of intrafusal fiber innervation of muscle spindle afferents in the anesthetized cat.

William R Reed1, Dong-Yuan Cao, Weiqing Ge, Joel G Pickar.   

Abstract

Increasing our knowledge regarding intrafusal fiber distribution and physiology of paraspinal proprioceptors may provide key insights regarding proprioceptive deficits in trunk control associated with low back pain and lead to more effective clinical intervention. The use of vertebral movement as a means to reliably stretch paraspinal muscles would greatly facilitate physiological study of paraspinal muscle proprioceptors where muscle tendon isolation is either very difficult or impossible. The effects of succinylcholine (SCh) on 194 muscle spindle afferents from lumbar longissimus or multifidus muscles in response to computer-controlled, ramp-and-hold movements of the L(6) vertebra were investigated in anesthetized cats. Paraspinal muscles were stretched by moving the L(6) vertebra 1.5-1.7 mm in the dorsal-ventral direction. Initial frequency (IF), dynamic difference (DD), their changes (∆) following SCh injection (100-400 μg kg(-1)), and post-SCh dynamic difference (SChDD) were measured. Muscle spindle intrafusal fiber terminations were classified as primary or secondary fibers as well as bag(1) (b(1)c), bag(2) (b(2)c), b(1)b(2)c, or chain (c) fibers. Intrafusal fiber subpopulations were distinguished using logarithmic transformation of SChDD and ∆IF distributions as established by previous investigators. Increases in DD indicate strength of b(1)c influence while increases in IF indicate strength of b(2)c influence. Out of 194 afferents, 46.9 % of afferents terminated on b(2)c fibers, 46.4 % on b(1)b(2)c fibers, 1 % on b(1)c fibers, and 5.7 % terminated on c fibers. Based on these intrafusal fiber subpopulation distributions, controlled vertebral movement can effectively substitute for direct tendon stretch and allow further investigation of paraspinal proprioceptors in this anatomically complex body region.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23229776      PMCID: PMC3578157          DOI: 10.1007/s00221-012-3362-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  35 in total

Review 1.  Why are there three types of intrafusal muscle fibers?

Authors:  A Taylor; P H Ellaway; R Durbaba
Journal:  Prog Brain Res       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 2.453

2.  Physiological properties of muscle spindles in dorsal neck muscles of the cat.

Authors:  F J Richmond; V C Abrahams
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1979-03       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  The lumbosacral dorsal rami of the cat.

Authors:  N Bogduk
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  1976-12       Impact factor: 2.610

4.  Structural features relative to the function of intrafusal muscle fibres in the cat.

Authors:  M H Gladden
Journal:  Prog Brain Res       Date:  1976       Impact factor: 2.453

5.  Muscle spindle complexes in muscles around upper cervical vertebrae in the cat.

Authors:  D A Bakker; F J Richmond
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1982-07       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Action of vibration on the response of cat muscle spindle Ia afferents to low frequency sinusoidal stretching.

Authors:  P B Matthews; J D Watson
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1981-08       Impact factor: 5.182

7.  The dorsal lumbar muscles of the cat.

Authors:  N Bogduk
Journal:  Anat Anz       Date:  1980

8.  Dynamic responsiveness of lumbar paraspinal muscle spindles during vertebral movement in the cat.

Authors:  Dong-Yuan Cao; Partap S Khalsa; Joel G Pickar
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-07-10       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Activation of cat muscle spindle primary, secondary and intermediate sensory endings by suxamethonium.

Authors:  M B Dutia
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1980-07       Impact factor: 5.182

10.  The effects of suxamethonium and acetylcholine on the behaviour of cat muscle spindles during dynamics stretching, and during fusimotor stimulation.

Authors:  P M Rack; D R Westbury
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1966-10       Impact factor: 5.182

View more
  5 in total

1.  Characteristics of Paraspinal Muscle Spindle Response to Mechanically Assisted Spinal Manipulation: A Preliminary Report.

Authors:  William R Reed; Joel G Pickar; Randall S Sozio; Michael A K Liebschner; Joshua W Little; Maruti R Gudavalli
Journal:  J Manipulative Physiol Ther       Date:  2017-06-17       Impact factor: 1.437

2.  Paraspinal Muscle Spindle Response to Intervertebral Fixation and Segmental Thrust Level During Spinal Manipulation in an Animal Model.

Authors:  William R Reed; Joel G Pickar
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Effect of changing lumbar stiffness by single facet joint dysfunction on the responsiveness of lumbar muscle spindles to vertebral movement.

Authors:  William R Reed; Joel G Pickar; Cynthia R Long
Journal:  J Can Chiropr Assoc       Date:  2014-06

4.  Effects of Thrust Magnitude and Duration on Immediate Postspinal Manipulation Trunk Muscle Spindle Responses.

Authors:  Carla R Lima; Randall S Sozio; AaMarryah C Law; Alicia J Nelson; Harshvardhan Singh; Christopher P Hurt; Peng Li; William R Reed
Journal:  J Manipulative Physiol Ther       Date:  2021-06-05       Impact factor: 1.300

5.  Neural Response During a Mechanically Assisted Spinal Manipulation in an Animal Model: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  William R Reed; Michael A K Liebschner; Randall S Sozio; Joel G Pickar; Maruti R Gudavalli
Journal:  J Nov Physiother Phys Rehabil       Date:  2015-04-06
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.