4.7 Article

Impaired facilitation of motor evoked potentials in incomplete spinal cord injury

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY
卷 253, 期 1, 页码 51-57

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-005-0921-x

关键词

transcranial magnetic stimulation; task-dependent facilitation; tibialis anterior; spinal cord injury

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives To improve the diagnosis of damaged spinal motor pathways in incomplete spinal cord injury (iSCI) by assessing the facilitation of lower limbs motor evoked potentials (MEP). Methods Control subjects (n = 12) and iSCI patients (n = 21) performed static and dynamic isometric foot dorsiflexions. MEPs induced by transcranial magnetic stimulation and EMG background of tibialis anterior muscle (TA) were analyzed. Static and dynamic muscle activation was performed at comparable levels of maximal voluntary contraction (MVC). The influence of the motor tasks on the excitability and facilitation of MEPs was compared between controls and iSCI patients. Results In the controls an increased facilitation of TA MEP at lower levels of dynamic compared with static activation (10-20% MVC) could be shown. At matched EMG background level the MEP responses were significantly increased. In the iSCI patients at a comparable level of TA activation the MEP responses were significantly reduced and 3 different patterns of MEP responses could be distinguished: i) preserved increment of TA MEP in the dynamic motor task, ii) unchanged MEP size in the dynamic and static motor task, and iii) elicitable MEPs in the dynamic motor task,which were abolished in the static motor task. Conclusions Static and dynamic motor tasks have different effects on TA MEP facilitation. The task-dependent modulation of TA MEPs is comparable to that described for upper limb muscles. Complementary to the MEP delay this approach allows for an estimation of the severity of spinal tract damage. The task-dependent modulation of TA MEPs is an additional diagnostic tool to improve the assessment and monitoring of motor function in iSCI.

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

4.7
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