4.6 Article

Reproducibility, and sensitivity to motor unit loss in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, of a novel MUNE method: MScanFit MUNE

期刊

CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
卷 128, 期 7, 页码 1380-1388

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2017.03.045

关键词

Motor unit number estimation; MScanFit; Multiple point stimulation; MUNIX; ALS; Reproducibility

资金

  1. Lundbeck Foundation
  2. Knud og Edith Eriksens Mindefond
  3. Soster og Verner Lipperts Fond
  4. Fonden til Laegevidenskabens Fremme
  5. Aage og Johanne Louis Hansens Fond

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To examine inter-and intra-rater reproducibility and sensitivity to motor unit loss of a novel motor unit number estimation (MUNE) method, MScanFit MUNE (MScan), compared to two traditional MUNE methods; Multiple point stimulation MUNE (MPS) and Motor Unit Number Index (MUNIX). Methods: Twenty-two ALS patients and 20 sex-and age-matched healthy controls were included. MPS, MUNIX, and MScan were performed twice each by two blinded physicians. Reproducibility of MUNE values was assessed by coefficient of variation (CV) and intra class correlation coefficient (ICC). Ability to detect motor unit loss was assessed by ROC curves and area under the curve (AUC). The times taken for each of the methods were recorded. Results: MScan was more reproducible than MPS and MUNIX both between and within operators. The mean CV for MScan (12.3%) was significantly lower than for MPS (24.7%) or MUNIX (21.5%). All methods had ICC > 0.94. MScan and Munix were significantly quicker to perform than MPS (6.3 m vs. 13.2 m). MScan (AUC = 0.930) and MPS (AUC = 0.899) were significantly better at discriminating between patients and healthy controls than MUNIX (AUC = 0.831). Conclusions: MScan was more consistent than MPS or MUNIX and better at distinguishing ALS patients from healthy subjects. Significance: MScan may improve detection and assessment of motor unit loss. (C) 2017 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据