4.2 Article

Airflow limitation in asthmatic children assessed with a non-invasive EMG technique

Journal

RESPIRATORY PHYSIOLOGY & NEUROBIOLOGY
Volume 133, Issue 1-2, Pages 89-97

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/S1569-9048(02)00130-1

Keywords

development, children; disease, asthma; mammals, humans; muscles, respiratory; EMG and FEV1; pattern of breathing, FEV1 and EMG; pharmacological agents, salbutamol

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of the study was to investigate the association between electromyography (EMG) of the diaphragm and intercostal muscles and the forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) at different levels of histamine-induced airflow limitation, and the response to salbutamol. Moreover, we assessed the reproducibility of the EMG measurements on 2 different occasions during different levels of airflow limitation in asthmatic school children. Fourteen children with asthma performed 2 histamine challenges with a 24-h time interval and 1 child performed 1 histamine challenge. The EMG signals were derived from surface electrodes. The logarithm of the EMG-activity-ratio (log EMGAR; mean peak-bottom ratio of respiratory muscle activity) was used as EMG parameter. The log EMGAR of the diaphragm (di) and the log EMGAR of the intercostal muscles (int) associated well with the histamine-induced fall in FEV1 at 5% steps from the baseline value. After administration of salbutamol log EMGARdi and log EMGARint returned to baseline mean peak-bottom values (for all leads P < 0.001). The EMGARdi and EMGARint values were reproducible at different levels of airflow limitation. This study showed that EMGARdi and EMGARint as a parameter for a change in electrical activity of the diaphragm and intercostal muscles associated well with FEV1, was reversible after salbutamol and was reproducible at different levels of histamine-induced airflow limitation in asthmatic school children. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available