TY - JOUR
T1 - Nerve, spinal cord and brain somatosensory evoked responses
T2 - a comparative study during electrical and magnetic peripheral nerve stimulation
AU - Zarola, Flora
AU - Rossini, Paolo M.
PY - 1991
Y1 - 1991
N2 - Somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) and compound nerve action potentials (cNAPs) have been recorded in 15 subjects during electrical and magnetic nerve stimulation. Peripheral records were gathered at Erb's point and on nerve trunks at the elbow during median and ulnar nerve stimulation at the wrist. Erb responses to electrical stimulation were larger in amplitude and shorter in duration than the magnetic ones when 'electrical' and 'magnetic' compound muscle action potentials (cMAPs) of comparable amplitudes were elicited. SEPs were recorded respectively at Cv7 and on the somatosensory scalp areas contra- and ipsilateral to the stimulated side. SEPs showed a statistically significant difference in amplitude only for the brachial plexus response and for the 'cortical' N20-P25 complex; differences were not found between the magnetic and electrical central conduction times (CCTs) or for the peripheral nerve response latencies. Magnetic stimulation preferentially excited the motor and proprioceptive fibres when the nerve trunks were stimulated at motor threshold intensities.
AB - Somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) and compound nerve action potentials (cNAPs) have been recorded in 15 subjects during electrical and magnetic nerve stimulation. Peripheral records were gathered at Erb's point and on nerve trunks at the elbow during median and ulnar nerve stimulation at the wrist. Erb responses to electrical stimulation were larger in amplitude and shorter in duration than the magnetic ones when 'electrical' and 'magnetic' compound muscle action potentials (cMAPs) of comparable amplitudes were elicited. SEPs were recorded respectively at Cv7 and on the somatosensory scalp areas contra- and ipsilateral to the stimulated side. SEPs showed a statistically significant difference in amplitude only for the brachial plexus response and for the 'cortical' N20-P25 complex; differences were not found between the magnetic and electrical central conduction times (CCTs) or for the peripheral nerve response latencies. Magnetic stimulation preferentially excited the motor and proprioceptive fibres when the nerve trunks were stimulated at motor threshold intensities.
KW - Electrical stimulation
KW - Magnetic stimulation
KW - Nerve action potentials
KW - Somatosensory evoked potentials
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0025913602&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0025913602&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/0168-5597(91)90084-B
DO - 10.1016/0168-5597(91)90084-B
M3 - Article
C2 - 1716561
AN - SCOPUS:0025913602
VL - 80
SP - 372
EP - 377
JO - Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology - Evoked Potentials
JF - Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology - Evoked Potentials
SN - 0168-5597
IS - 5
ER -