Literature DB >> 31256880

Magnetic Motor Evoked Potential Recording in Horses Using Intramuscular Needle Electrodes and Surface Electrodes.

Joke Rijckaert1, Bart Pardon2, Luc Van Ham3, Gunther van Loon2, Piet Deprez2.   

Abstract

To date, motor evoked potential (MEP) recording in animals is often performed using intramuscular monopolar needle electrodes. Their placement and use has several disadvantages. Adhesive surface electrodes appear to be attractive because they are painless and easy to place. Because these are not used in horses, a scouting study is performed to (1) explore the applicability of surface electrodes in horses (2) determine the repeatability of motor latency times (MLTs) and amplitude measurements, and (3) to investigate if MLTs and amplitude values of surface electrode recordings were similar to intramuscular needle electrode recordings. Transcranial MEP recordings were performed by both coated needle and surface electrodes on ten sedated warmblood horses. Mean MLTs for the thoracic limbs were 20.8 ± 1.5 ms for needle and 21.2 ± 1.4 ms for surface electrode recording and 39.4 ± 3.8 ms and 39.2 ± 3.8 ms for the pelvic limbs, respectively. Mean amplitude values were 8.3 ± 4.1 and 7.2 ± 4.7 mV for the thoracic limbs and 4.2 ± 3.1 and 3.8 ± 2.4 mV for the pelvic limbs, respectively. A good agreement and repeatability for MLTs but insufficient agreement and repeatability for amplitude between both recording types were determined by Bland-Altman plots and Passing-Bablok regression and coefficients of variation calculation. In conclusion, this preliminary study shows that surface electrode recording of MEP is possible and well tolerated in horses. Surface recordings were repeatable and look similar to the intramuscular recordings when regarding MLTs, but overshadowing effects of large test-to-test variations precluded a conclusion concerning amplitude.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ataxia; Compound muscle action potential; Electromyography; Neurologic test; Spinal cord

Year:  2018        PMID: 31256880     DOI: 10.1016/j.jevs.2018.05.218

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Equine Vet Sci        ISSN: 0737-0806            Impact factor:   1.583


  4 in total

1.  Extramuscular Recording of Spontaneous EMG Activity and Transcranial Electrical Elicited Motor Potentials in Horses: Characteristics of Different Subcutaneous and Surface Electrode Types and Practical Guidelines.

Authors:  Sanne Lotte Journée; Henricus Louis Journée; Stephen Michael Reed; Hanneke Irene Berends; Cornelis Marinus de Bruijn; Cathérine John Ghislaine Delesalle
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2020-07-17       Impact factor: 4.677

2.  Comparison of Muscle MEPs From Transcranial Magnetic and Electrical Stimulation and Appearance of Reflexes in Horses.

Authors:  Sanne Lotte Journée; Henricus Louis Journée; Hanneke Irene Berends; Steven Michael Reed; Cornelis Marinus de Bruijn; Cathérine John Ghislaine Delesalle
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2020-09-25       Impact factor: 4.677

3.  Accuracy of transcranial magnetic stimulation and a Bayesian latent class model for diagnosis of spinal cord dysfunction in horses.

Authors:  Joke Rijckaert; Els Raes; Sebastien Buczinski; Michèle Dumoulin; Piet Deprez; Luc Van Ham; Gunther van Loon; Bart Pardon
Journal:  J Vet Intern Med       Date:  2020-02-06       Impact factor: 3.333

4.  Determination of magnetic motor evoked potential latency time cutoff values for detection of spinal cord dysfunction in horses.

Authors:  Joke Rijckaert; Bart Pardon; Veronique Saey; Els Raes; Luc Van Ham; Richard Ducatelle; Gunther van Loon; Piet Deprez
Journal:  J Vet Intern Med       Date:  2019-09-06       Impact factor: 3.333

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.