Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Muscle Nerve ; 40(1): 37-41, 2009 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19533636

RESUMO

To determine the optimal recording site for phrenic nerve conduction studies, six different recording techniques were compared in 11 healthy volunteers (22 phrenic nerves). The mean diaphragm compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitude, side-to-side difference, and the number of studies with a false-positive result (CMAP amplitude <0.30 mV) were compared for each technique. The largest amplitude (0.65 +/- 0.23 mV, range 0.30-1.2 mV) with good right-left agreement (mean difference 0.15 mV) and no false positives was obtained using technique 1, where the G1 electrode was positioned 5 cm above the xiphoid process and G2 16 cm from G1 along the costal margin. This was also the easiest technique to perform. It does not require rib counting, which may be difficult and inaccurate, especially in overweight patients. At least one false positive occurred with each of the remaining five techniques.


Assuntos
Potenciais de Ação/fisiologia , Diafragma/fisiologia , Eletrodos , Adulto , Análise de Variância , Estimulação Elétrica/métodos , Eletromiografia/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Condução Nervosa/fisiologia , Nervo Frênico/fisiologia , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA