scholarly journals Redundancy Among Parameters Describing the Input-Output Relation of Motor Evoked Potentials in Healthy Subjects and Stroke Patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire Kemlin ◽  
Eric Moulton ◽  
Sara Leder ◽  
Marion Houot ◽  
Sabine Meunier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Evoked Potentials ◽  
Healthy Subjects ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Input Output ◽  
Stroke Patients

Predicting Hand Motor Recovery in Severe Stroke: The Role of Motor Evoked Potentials in Relation to Early Clinical Assessment

2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annette A. van Kuijk ◽  
Jaco W. Pasman ◽  
Henk T. Hendricks ◽  
Machiel J. Zwarts ◽  
Alexander C. H. Geurts
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Evoked Potentials ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Clinical Assessment ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Motor Recovery ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Abductor Digiti Minimi

Objective. The primary aim of this study was to compare the predictive value of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) and early clinical assessment with regard to long-term hand motor recovery in patients with profound hemiplegia after stroke. Methods. The sample was an inception cohort of 39 stroke patients with an acute, ischemic, supratentorial stroke and an initial upper-extremity paralysis admitted to an academic hospital. Hand motor function recovery was defined at 26 weeks poststroke as a Fugl–Meyer Motor Assessment (FMA) hand score >3 points. The following prognostic factors were compared at week 1 and week 3 poststroke: motor functions as assessed by the FMA upper-extremity and lower-extremity subscores, and the presence of an MEP in the abductor digiti minimi and biceps brachii muscle. Results. Both the presence of an abductor digiti minimi–MEP and any motor recovery in the FMA upper-extremity subscore showed a positive predictive value of 1.00 at weeks 1 and 3. The FMA lower-extremity subscore showed the best negative predictive value (0.90; 95% CI 0.78-1.00 at week 1 and 0.95; 95% CI 0.87-1.00 at week 3). Conclusions. In stroke patients with an initial paralysis of the upper extremity the presence or absence of an MEP has similar predictive value compared with early clinical assessment with regard to long-term hand motor recovery.

Abstract #16: Input-Output Slope Predicts Effects of cTBS on Motor Evoked Potentials

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. e6
Author(s):  
S. Parchure ◽  
R. Wurzman ◽  
B. Erickson ◽  
D. Harvey ◽  
D. Sacchetti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Evoked Potentials ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Input Output

The size of motor-evoked potentials: influencing parameters and quantification

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kai M. Rösler ◽  
Michel R. Magistris
Keyword(s):  
Evoked Potentials ◽  
Motor Neurons ◽  
Healthy Subjects ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Conduction Block ◽  
Phase Cancellation ◽  
Pathological Conditions ◽  
The Central Nervous System ◽  
Stimulation Technique ◽  
Triple Stimulation Technique

This article discusses parameters influencing the size of motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in normal and pathological conditions, and the methods of meaningful quantification of the MEPs. MEPs are widely used to study the physiology of corticospinal conduction in healthy subjects and in patients with diseases of the central nervous system. The characteristics of MEP size are, stimulus intensity, coil positioning, and facilitation. MEPs show variability in size and shape from one stimulus to the next, even if the stimulus parameters are kept constant. This article describes the triple stimulation technique (TST), which was developed to eliminate the effects of phase cancellation from the MEPs, to allow for a better quantification. Pathological conditions may modify the parameters discussed in the article and influence the size of the MEPs by lesions of motor neurons or of their axons, central conduction velocity slowing, or conduction block.

Reciprocal changes in input–output curves of motor evoked potentials while learning motor skills

2012 ◽  
Vol 1473 ◽  
pp. 114-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Makoto Suzuki ◽  
Hikari Kirimoto ◽  
Hideaki Onishi ◽  
Sumio Yamada ◽  
Hiroyuki Tamaki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Evoked Potentials ◽  
Motor Skills ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Input Output

scholarly journals Can somatosensory electrical stimulation relieve spasticity in post-stroke patients? A TMS pilot study

2018 ◽  
Vol 63 (4) ◽  
pp. 501-506 ◽  
Author(s):  
André Salles Cunha Peres ◽  
Victor Hugo Souza ◽  
João Marcos Yamasaki Catunda ◽  
Kelley Cristine Mazzeto-Betti ◽  
Taiza Elaine Grespan Santos-Pontelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Electrical Stimulation ◽  
Healthy Subjects ◽  
Motor Evoked Potentials ◽  
Wrist Joint ◽  
Single Pulse ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Passive Resistance ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Carry Over ◽  
Carry Over Effect

Abstract Evidence suggests that somatosensory electrical stimulation (SES) may decrease the degree of spasticity from neural drives, although there is no agreement between corticospinal modulation and the level of spasticity. Thus, stroke patients and healthy subjects were submitted to SES (3 Hz) for 30′ on the impaired and dominant forearms, respectively. Motor evoked potentials induced by single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation were collected from two forearm muscles before and after SES. The passive resistance of the wrist joint was measured with an isokinetic system. We found no evidence of an acute carry-over effect of SES on the degree of spasticity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document