| Literature DB >> 30357072 |
Daniele Fontes Ferreira Bernardes1, Ricardo Ferreira Bento2, Maria Valeria Schimidt Goffi Gomez3,4.
Abstract
Introduction Surface electromyographic activity may not be symmetric, even in subjects with no facial paralysis history. Objective To evaluate the contribution of the index of electromyographic (IEMG) activity in the identification of the two extremes of the facial paralysis course. Methods Thirty-four subjects with unilateral peripheral facial paralysis were selected. A control group was composed of volunteers without a history of facial paralysis. The electromyographic assessment of the facial muscle was performed by placing surface electrodes during movements of the forehead, eyes and lips using MIOTEC equipment, such as the MIOTOOL (Miotec, Porto Alegre, Brazil) software. The electromyographic activity was also recorded in other channels during the primary activity to identify the presence of synkinesis. The statistical analysis was performed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences for Macintosh (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA). The IEMG activity was obtained from the division of the electromyographic activity root mean square (RMS) values on both sides. Results There was a statistically significant difference among the groups in all the analyzed indexes. The ocular-oral synkinesis in all patients must be correctly identified (with 100% sensitivity and specificity) using an IEMG activity of 1.62 as a cutoff point. The oral-ocular synkinesis must be correctly identified (93.3% sensitivity and 95.9% specificity) using the IEMG activity of 1.79 as a cutoff point. Conclusion The IEMG activity is below the normal scores in patients in the flaccid stage, whereas patients in the sequelae stage can either show normal values or values above or below the normal scores. The IEMG activity was shown to have high sensitivity and specificity in the identification of synkinesis.Entities:
Keywords: electromyography; facial paralysis; surface
Year: 2017 PMID: 30357072 PMCID: PMC6197969 DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1607335
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol ISSN: 1809-4864
Demographic data of the sample analyzed in the flaccid stage, sequelae stage and control groups
| Group 1 | Group 2 | Control Group | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (Years) | 37.6 (±13.2) | 48.1 (±10.0) | 42.1 (±16.5) |
| Time since the onset of PFP (months) | 6.5 (±10.1) | 22.0 (±17.3) | – |
| Etiology | |||
| Idiopathic | 11 (64.7%) | 9 (52.9%) | – |
| Traumatic | 6 (35.3%) | 8 (47.1%) | – |
| Side of Paralysis | |||
| Right | 7 (41.0%) | 5 (29.0%) | – |
| Left | 10 (59.0%) | 12 (71.0%) | – |
| HB Grade | |||
| I | – | – | 20 (100%) |
| III | – | 7 (41.0%) | – |
| IV | – | 10 (59.0%) | – |
| V | 4 (23.5%) | – | – |
| VI | 13 (76.5%) | – | |
Abbreviations: HB, House-Brackman; PFP, Peripheral Facial Paralysis.
Data presented as mean (±standard deviation) or N (%).
Normal range of IEMG activity for each segment in each movement obtained in the control group
| Movement | Segment of electromyographic activity register | Normal range 1 of the IEMG activity |
|---|---|---|
| Raising eyebrows | Eyebrows | 0.59–1.39 |
| Eye closure | Eyes | 0.59–1.28 |
| Lips | 0.47–1.55 | |
| Lip puckering | Lips | 0.79–1.28 |
| Eyes | 0.51–1.45 | |
| Smile (lip retraction) | Lips | 0.64–1.28 |
| Eyes | 0.71–1.58 |
Abbreviation: IEMG, index of electromyographic activity.
1: Interval between percentile p5 and p95.
Index of electromyographic activity averages of each segment of the face evaluated in the three groups studied
| Movement | Segment of electromyographic activity register | Group 1 | Group 2 | Control |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raise eyebrows | Eyebrows | 0.23 ± 0.09 a | 0.66 ± 0.38 b | 1.0 ± 0.23 c | < 0.001 |
| Eye closure | Eyes | 0.29 ± 0.19 a | 0.67 ± 0.34 b | 0.89 ± 0.28 c | < 0.001 |
| Lips | 0.60 ± 0.32 a | 2.11 ± 0.85 b | 1.11 ± 0.28 c | < 0.001 | |
| Lip puckering | Lips | 0.30 ± 0.11 a | 0.60 ± 0.22 b | 1.04 ± 0.18 c | < 0.001 |
| Eyes | 0.80 ± 0.35 a | 2.59 ± 0.89 b | 0.95 ± 0.42 a | < 0.001 | |
| Smile | Lips | 0.22 ± 0.12 a | 0.71 ± 0.69 b | 0.99 ± 0.18 b | < 0.001 |
| Eyes | 0.37 ± 0.17 a | 0.98 ± 0.43 b | 1.04 ± 0.27 b | < 0.001 |
Legend: a, b, c letter indices identify statistically significant differences found between the averages of groups (multiple comparisons test of Tukey).
Fig. 1Error bars representing the mean and the standard deviation of the IEMG activity of the movement raising the eyebrows in the studied groups.
Fig. 2Error bars representing the mean and the standard deviation of the IEMG activity of the movement of eye closure in the studied groups.
Fig. 3Error bars representing the mean and the standard deviation of the IEMG activity of the movement of puckering lips in the studied groups.
Fig. 4Error bars representing the mean and the standard deviation of the index of electromyographical activity in the movement of lip retraction in the studied groups.
Prevalence of patients with normal, low or high index of electromyographic activity in the eyebrows segment in both studied groups
| Movement | Segment or electromyographic activity register | Electromyographic | Group 1 | Group 2 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raising eyebrows | Eyebrows | Low | 17 (100%) | 7 (41.2%) | |
| Normal | 0 (0.0%) | 9 (52.9%) | 0.001 | ||
| High | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (5.9%) |
Prevalence of patients with normal, low or high index of electromyographic activity in the eyes segment in both studied groups
| Movement | Segment or electromyographic activity register | Electromyographic | Group 1 | Group 2 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Eye closure | Eyes | Low | 15 (88.2%) | 7 (41.2%) | 05 |
| Normal | 2 (11.8%) | 9 (52.9%) | |||
| High | 0 (0.0%) | 1 (5.9%) | |||
| Lips | Low | 7 (41.2%) | 0 (0.0%) | < 0.001 | |
| Normal | 10 (58.8%) | 3 (17.6%) | |||
| High | 0 (0.0%) | 14 (82.4%) |
Prevalence of patients with normal, low or high index of electromyographic activity during lip protrusion in both studied groups
| Movement | Segment or electromyographic activity register | Electromyographic | Group |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paralysis | Paralysis | ||||
| Lip puckering | Lips | Low | 17 (100%) | 14 (82.4%) | 0.23 |
| Normal | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (17.6%) | |||
| High | 0 (0.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | |||
| Eyes | Low | 1 (5.9%) | 0 (0.0%) | < 0.001 | |
| Normal | 14 (82.4%) | 1 (5.9%) | |||
| High | 2 (11.8%) | 16 (94.1%) | |||
Prevalence of patients with normal, low or high index of electromyographic activity in the lips segment in both studied groups
| Segment or electromyographic activity register | Electromyographic | Group |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paralysis | Paralysis | ||||
| Smile (lip retraction) | Lips | Low | 17 (100%) | 12 (70.6%) | 0.05 |
| Normal | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (17.6%) | |||
| High | 0 (0.0%) | 2 (11.8%) | |||
| Eyes | Low | 17 (100%) | 7 (41.2%) | 0.001 | |
| Normal | 0 (0.0%) | 7 (41.2%) | |||
| High | 0 (0.0%) | 3 (17.6%) | |||
Index of electromyographic activity between subjects with and without synkinesia in the segment of lips and eyes
| Movement | Segment or electromyographic activity register | Synkinesis |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | |||||
| N | Index | N | Index | |||
| Eye closure | Lips | 13 | 2.43 ± 0,.67 | 41 | 0.89 ± 0.40 | < 0.001 |
| Puckering lips | Eyes | 15 | 2.73 ± 0.84 | 39 | 0.91 ± 0.41 | < 0.001 |
Abbreviation: EMG,
Fig. 5Receiver operator characteristics (ROC) curve for the clinical diagnosis of synkinesis in lips during the movement of eyes closure (ocular-oral) through index of electromyographical activity.
Fig. 6Receiver operator characteristics (ROC) curve of the index of electromyographic activity using different cutoff points for clinical identification of synkinesis in the eyes during the movement of puckering lips (oral-ocular).
Cutoff point that presents at the same time greater sensitivity and specificity
| Cutoff point | Sensitivity | Specificity |
|---|---|---|
| 1.21 | 100% | 82.1% |
| 1.33 | 93.3% | 82.1% |
| 1.48 | 93.3% | 84.6% |
| 1.51 | 93.3% | 87.2% |
| 1.52 | 93.3% | 89.7% |
| 1.64 | 93.3% | 92.3% |
| 1.79 | 93.3% | 95.9% |
| 1.89 | 86.7% | 95.9% |
| 1.98 | 86.7% | 97.4% |
| 2.07 | 86.7% | 100% |