The stimulus–response curve and motor unit variability in normal subjects and subjects with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
Corresponding Author
R. D. Henderson MB, BS
Department of Neurology, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland 4029, Australia
Department of Neurology, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland 4029, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorG. R. Ridall PhD
School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
Search for more papers by this authorA. N. Pettitt PhD
School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
Search for more papers by this authorP. A. McCombe PhD
Department of Neurology, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland 4029, Australia
Search for more papers by this authorJ. R. Daube MD
Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
R. D. Henderson MB, BS
Department of Neurology, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland 4029, Australia
Department of Neurology, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland 4029, AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorG. R. Ridall PhD
School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
Search for more papers by this authorA. N. Pettitt PhD
School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
Search for more papers by this authorP. A. McCombe PhD
Department of Neurology, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland 4029, Australia
Search for more papers by this authorJ. R. Daube MD
Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
The behavior and stability of motor units (MUs) in response to electrical stimulation of different intensities can be assessed with the stimulus–response curve, which is a graphical representation of the size of the compound muscle action potential (CMAP) in relation to stimulus intensity. To examine MU characteristics across the whole stimulus range, the variability of CMAP responses to electrical stimulation, and the differences that occur between normal and disease states, the curve was studied in 11 normal subjects and 16 subjects with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). In normal subjects, the curve showed a gradual increase in CMAP size with increasing stimulus intensity, although one or two discrete steps were sometimes observed in the upper half of the curve, indicating the activation of large MUs at higher intensities. In ALS subjects, large discrete steps, due to loss of MUs and collateral sprouting, were frequently present. Variability of the CMAP responses was greater than baseline variability, indicating variability of MU responses, and at certain levels this variability was up to 100 μVms. The stimulus–response curve shows differences between normal and ALS subjects and provides information on MU activation and variability throughout the curve. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Muscle Nerve, 2006
REFERENCES
- 1 Albrecht E, Kuntzer T. Number of EDB motor units using an adapted multiple point stimulation method: normal values and longitudinal studies in ALS and peripheral neuropathies. Clin Neurophysiol 2004; 115: 557–563.
- 2 Bennett MR, Pettigrew AG. The formation of synapses in amphibian striated muscle during development. J Physiol (Lond) 1975; 252: 203–239.
- 3 Boe SG, Stashuk DW, Brown WF, Doherty TJ. Decomposition-based quantitative elctromyography: effect of force on motor unit potentials and motor unit number estimates. Muscle Nerve 2005; 31: 365–373.
- 4 Bromberg M. Consensus. In: MB Bromberg, editor. Motor unit number estimation (MUNE). Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2003. p 335–338.
- 5 Brown W, Milner-Brown HS. Some electrical properties of motor units and their effects on the methods of estimating motor unit numbers. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1976; 39: 249–257.
- 6 Brown WF, Strong MJ, Snow R. Methods for estimating numbers of motor units in biceps-brachialis muscles and losses of motor units with aging. Muscle Nerve 1988; 11: 423–432.
- 7 Burke D, Kiernan MC, Bostock H. Excitability of human axons. Clin Neurophysiol 2001; 112: 1575–1585.
- 8 Daube JR. Estimating the number of motor units in a muscle. J Clin Neurophysiol 1995; 12: 585–594.
- 9 Daube JR. MUNE by statistical analysis. In: MB Bromberg, editor. Motor unit number estimation. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2003. p 51–71.
- 10 Dimitru D. Electrodiagnostic medicine. Philadelphia: Hanley & Belfus; 1995. p 67–68.
- 11 Doherty TJ, Brown WF. A method for the longitudinal study of human thenar motor units. Muscle Nerve 1994; 17: 1029–1036.
- 12 Doherty TJ, Stashuk DW, Brown WF. Axon excitability in motor unit number estimation (MUNE). In: MB Bromberg, editor. Motor unit number estimation (MUNE). Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2003. p 17–28.
- 13 Ekstedt J, Nilsson G, Stalberg E. Calculation of the electromyographic jitter. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1974; 37: 526–539.
- 14 Enoka RM. Activation order of motor axons in electrically evoked contractions. Muscle Nerve 2002; 25: 763–764.
- 15 Galea V, de Bruin H, Cavasin R, McComas AJ. The numbers and relative sizes of motor units estimated by computer. Muscle Nerve 1991; 14: 1123–1130.
- 16 Hales JP, Lin CS, Bostock H. Variations in excitability of single human motor axons, related to stochastic properties of nodal sodium channels. J Physiol (Lond) 2004; 559: 953–964.
- 17 Henderson RD, McClelland R, Daube JR. Effect of changing data collection parameters on statistical motor unit number estimates. Muscle Nerve 2003; 27: 320–331.
- 18 Henderson RD, Daube JR. Decrement in surface-recorded motor unit potentials in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Neurology 2004; 63: 1670–1674.
- 19 Henneman E, Somjen G, Carpenter DO. Excitability and inhibitability of motoneurons of different sizes. J Neurophysiol 1965; 28: 599–620.
- 20 Jillapalli D, Shefner JM. Single motor unit variability with threshold stimulation in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and normal subjects. Muscle Nerve 2004; 30: 578–584.
- 21 Kadrie HA, Yates SK, Milner-Brown HS, Brown WF. Multiple point electrical stimulation of ulnar and median nerves. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1976; 39: 973–985.
- 22
Kiernan MC,
Burke D,
Andersen KV,
Bostock H.
Multiple measures of axonal excitability: a new approach in clinical testing.
Muscle Nerve
2000;
23:
399–409.
10.1002/(SICI)1097-4598(200003)23:3<399::AID-MUS12>3.0.CO;2-G CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
- 23 Kuwabara S, Cappelen-Smith C, Lin CS, Mogyoros I, Bostock H, Burke D. Excitability properties of median and peroneal motor axons. Muscle Nerve 2000; 23: 1365–1373.
- 24 Maselli RA, Wollman RL, Leung C, Distad B, Palombi S, Richman DP, et al. Neuromuscular transmission in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Muscle Nerve 1993; 16: 1193–1203.
- 25 McComas AJ, Fawcett PR, Campbell MJ, Sica RE. Electrophysiological estimation of the number of motor units within a human muscle. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1971; 34: 121–131.
- 26 McComas AJ Sica RE, Campell MJ, Upton AR. Functional compensation in partially denervated muscles. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1971; 34: 453–460.
- 27 McNeil CJ, Doherty TJ, Stashuk DW, Rice CL. The effect of contraction intensity on motor unit number estimates of the tibialis anterior. Clin Neurophysiol 2005; 116: 1342–1347.
- 28 Mogyoros I, Kiernan MC, Burke D. Strength–duration properties of human peripheral nerve. Brain 1996; 119: 439–447.
- 29 Mogyoros I, Kiernan MC Burke D, Bostock H. Strength–duration properties of sensory and motor axons in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Brain 1998; 121: 851–859.
- 30 Monti RJ, Roy RR, Edgerton VR. Role of motor unit structure in defining function. Muscle Nerve 2001; 24: 848–866.
- 31 Priori A, Cinnante C, Pesenti A, Carpo M, Cappellari A, Nobile-Orazio E, et al. Distinctive abnormalities of motor axonal strength-duration properties in multifocal motor neuropathy and in motor neurone disease. Brain 2002; 125: 2481–2490.
- 32 Neto HS, Filho JM, Passini R Jr, Marques MJ. Number and size of motor units in thenar muscles. Clin Anat 2004; 17: 308–311.
- 33 Shefner JM. Motor unit number estimation in human neurological diseases and animal models. Clin Neurophysiol 2001; 112: 955–964.
- 34 Shefner JM, Cudkowicz ME, Zhang H, Shoenfeld D, Jillapalli D, Northeast ALS Consortium. The use of statistical MUNE in a multicenter clinical trial. Muscle Nerve 2004; 30: 463–469.
- 35
Slawnych M,
Laszlo C,
Herschler C.
Motor unit estimates obtained using the new “MUESA” method.
Muscle Nerve
1996;
19:
626–636.
10.1002/(SICI)1097-4598(199605)19:5<626::AID-MUS11>3.0.CO;2-L CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
- 36 Slawnych M. Issues in motor unit number estimation. In: MB Bromberg, editor. Motor unit number estimation (MUNE). Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2003. p 22–28.
- 37 Stashuk DW. Decomposition and quantitative analysis of clinical electromyographic signals. Med Eng Phys 1999; 21: 389–404.
- 38 Stein RB, Yang JF. Methods for estimating the number of motor units in human muscles. Ann Neurol 1990; 28: 487–495.
- 39 Sunderland S. The anatomy and physiology of nerve injury. Muscle Nerve 1990; 13: 771–784.
- 40 Swash M, Schwartz MS. A longitudinal study of changes in motor units in motor neuron disease. J Neurol Sci 1982; 56: 185–197.
- 41 Thomas CK, Nelson G, Than L, Zijdewind I. Motor unit activation order during electrically evoked contractions of paralyzed or partially paralyzed muscles. Muscle Nerve 2002; 25: 797–804.
- 42 Vagg R, Mogyoros I, Kiernan MC, Burke D. Activity-dependent hyperpolarization of human motor axons produced by natural activity. J Physiol (Lond) 1998; 507: 919–925.
- 43 Wang FC, Delwaide PJ. Number and relative size of thenar motor units in ALS patients: application of the adapted multiple point stimulation method. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1998; 109: 36–43.
- 44 Wang FC, De Pasqua V, Gerard P, Delwaide PJ. Prognostic value of decremental responses to repetitive nerve stimulation in ALS patients. Neurology 2001; 57: 897–899.