Reproducibility of Phrenic Nerve Conduction Time

1986 ◽  
Vol 71 (s15) ◽  
pp. 11P-11P
Author(s):  
Anne Mier ◽  
Conor Brophy ◽  
John Moxham ◽  
Malcolm Green
Keyword(s):  
Phrenic Nerve ◽  
Nerve Conduction ◽  
Conduction Time

Phrenic Nerve Conduction Time in Myasthenia Gravis

1986 ◽  
Vol 70 (s13) ◽  
pp. 70P-70P
Author(s):  
A. Mier ◽  
C. Brophy ◽  
J. Moxham ◽  
C.W.H. Havard ◽  
Green Malcolm
Keyword(s):  
Myasthenia Gravis ◽  
Phrenic Nerve ◽  
Nerve Conduction ◽  
Conduction Time

scholarly journals Effect of brachial plexus co-activation on phrenic nerve conduction time

Thorax ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 54 (9) ◽  
pp. 765-770 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y M Luo ◽  
M I Polkey ◽  
R A Lyall ◽  
J Moxham
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Phrenic Nerve ◽  
Nerve Conduction ◽  
Conduction Time ◽  
Co Activation

Identification of prolonged phrenic nerve conduction time in the ICU: magnetic versus electrical stimulation

2011 ◽  
Vol 37 (12) ◽  
pp. 1962-1968 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandre Demoule ◽  
Capucine Morelot-Panzini ◽  
Hélène Prodanovic ◽  
Christophe Cracco ◽  
Julien Mayaux ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Phrenic Nerve ◽  
Nerve Conduction ◽  
Conduction Time

scholarly journals Comparison of magnetic and electrical phrenic nerve stimulation in assessment of phrenic nerve conduction time

1997 ◽  
Vol 82 (4) ◽  
pp. 1190-1199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Similowski ◽  
Selma Mehiri ◽  
Alexandre Duguet ◽  
Valérie Attali ◽  
Christian Straus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Phrenic Nerve ◽  
Nerve Conduction ◽  
Clinical Implications ◽  
Conduction Time ◽  
Electromyographic Activity ◽  
Average Difference ◽  
Phrenic Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Stimulation Of

Similowski, Thomas, Selma Mehiri, Alexandre Duguet, Valérie Attali, Christian Straus, and Jean-Philippe Derenne.Comparison of magnetic and electrical phrenic nerve stimulation in assessment of phrenic nerve conduction time. J. Appl. Physiol. 82(4): 1190–1199, 1997.—Cervical magnetic stimulation (CMS), a nonvolitional test of diaphragm function, is an easy means for measuring the latency of the diaphragm motor response to phrenic nerve stimulation, namely, phrenic nerve conduction time (PNCT). In this application, CMS has some practical advantages over electrical stimulation of the phrenic nerve in the neck (ES). Although normal ES-PNCTs have been consistently reported between 7 and 8 ms, data are less homogeneous for CMS-PNCTs, with some reports suggesting lower values. This study systematically compares ES- and CMS-PNCTs for the same subjects. Surface recordings of diaphragmatic electromyographic activity were obtained for seven healthy volunteers during ES and CMS of varying intensities. On average, ES-PNCTs amounted to 6.41 ± 0.84 ms and were little influenced by stimulation intensity. With CMS, PNCTs were significantly lower (average difference 1.05 ms), showing a marked increase as CMS intensity lessened. ES and CMS values became comparable for a CMS intensity 65% of the maximal possible intensity of 2.5 Tesla. These findings may be the result of phrenic nerve depolarization occurring more distally than expected with CMS, which may have clinical implications regarding the diagnosis and follow-up of phrenic nerve lesions.

scholarly journals Diaphragm EMG measured by cervical magnetic and electrical phrenic nerve stimulation

1998 ◽  
Vol 85 (6) ◽  
pp. 2089-2099 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y. M. Luo ◽  
M. I. Polkey ◽  
L. C. Johnson ◽  
R. A. Lyall ◽  
M. L. Harris ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chest Wall ◽  
Phrenic Nerve ◽  
Nerve Conduction ◽  
Compound Muscle Action Potential ◽  
Normal Subjects ◽  
Conduction Time ◽  
Surface Electrodes ◽  
Muscle Action Potential ◽  
Electrode Positioning ◽  
Phrenic Nerves

The purpose of the study was to compare electrical stimulation (ES) and cervical magnetic stimulation (CMS) of the phrenic nerves for the measurement of the diaphragm compound muscle action potential (CMAP) and phrenic nerve conduction time. A specially designed esophageal catheter with three pairs of electrodes was used, with control of electrode positioning in 10 normal subjects. Pair A and pair B were close to the diaphragm ( pair A lower than pair B); pair C was positioned 10 cm above the diaphragm to detect the electromyogram from extradiaphragmatic muscles. Electromyograms were also recorded from upper and lower chest wall surface electrodes. The shape of the CMAP measured with CMS (CMS-CMAP) usually differed from that of the CMAP measured with ES (ES-CMAP). Moreover, the latency of the CMS-CMAP from pair B (5.3 ± 0.4 ms) was significantly shorter than that from pair A (7.1 ± 0.7 ms). The amplitude of the CMS-CMAP (1.00 ± 0.15 mV) was much higher than that of ES-CMAP (0.26 ± 0.15 mV) when recorded from pair C. Good-quality CMS-CMAPs could be recorded in some subjects from an electrode positioned very low in the esophagus. The differences between ES-CMAP and CMS-CMAP recorded either from esophageal or chest wall electrodes make CMS unreliable for the measurement of phrenic nerve conduction time.

Phrenic Nerve Conduction Time in Normals

1986 ◽  
Vol 70 (s13) ◽  
pp. 70P-70P
Author(s):  
A. Mier ◽  
C. Brophy ◽  
J. Moxham ◽  
Malcolm Green
Keyword(s):  
Phrenic Nerve ◽  
Nerve Conduction ◽  
Conduction Time

Effects of phrenic nerve cooling on diaphragmatic function

1987 ◽  
Vol 63 (5) ◽  
pp. 1763-1769 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Dureuil ◽  
N. Viires ◽  
R. Pariente ◽  
J. M. Desmonts ◽  
M. Aubier
Keyword(s):  
Phrenic Nerve ◽  
Nerve Conduction ◽  
Conduction Block ◽  
Conduction Time ◽  
Transdiaphragmatic Pressure ◽  
Cooling Period ◽  
Diaphragmatic Function ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Phrenic Stimulation

The effects of phrenic nerve cooling at 0 degrees C on the nerve and diaphragmatic function were evaluated in dogs. Eleven dogs, anesthetized and mechanically ventilated, were studied. Left diaphragmatic function was assessed by recording the transdiaphragmatic pressure (Pdi) generated during electrical stimulation of the left phrenic nerve at different frequencies (0.5, 30, and 100 Hz). Phrenic nerve stimulations were achieved either directly by electrodes placed around the phrenic nerve above its pericardial course or by intramuscular electrodes placed close to the phrenic nerve endings. Electrical activity of the hemidiaphragm (Edi) was recorded and phrenic nerve conduction time (PNCT) was measured during direct phrenic stimulation. A transpericardial cooling of the nerve, at 0 degrees C, on a length of 1 cm, was performed during 30 min (group A, n = 7) or 5 min (group B, n = 4). After the cooling period, phrenic and diaphragmatic functions were assessed hourly for 4 h (H1-H4). Cooling the phrenic nerve produced a complete phrenic nerve conduction block in all dogs, 100 +/- 10 s after the onset of cold exposure. Conduction recovery time was longer in group A (11 +/- 7 min) than in group B (2 +/- 0.5 min) and PNCT remained increased throughout the study in group A. Furthermore, in group A, Pdi and Edi during direct phrenic stimulation were markedly depressed from H1 to H4. No change in these parameters was noted until H3 during intramuscular stimulation, time at which a significant decrease occurred. By contrast, Pdi and Edi from direct and intramuscular stimulations remained unchanged throughout the study in group B.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document