Repeatability of Nerve conduction Measurements using Automation

ABSTRACTObjectiveTo quantify nerve conduction study (NCS) reproducibility utilizing an automated NCS system (NC-stat®, NeuroMetrix, Inc.).MethodHealthy volunteers without neuropathic symptoms participated in the study. Their median, ulnar, peroneal, and tibial nerves were tested twice (7 days apart) by the same technician with an NC-stat® instrument. Pre-fabricated electrode arrays specific to each nerve were used. Both motor responses (compound motor action potential [CMAP] and F-waves –all nerves) and sensory responses (sensory nerve action potentials [SNAP] –median and ulnar nerves only) were recorded following supramaximal stimuli. Automated algorithms determined all NCS parameters: distal motor latency (DML), mean F-wave latency (FWL), distal sensory latency (DSL), CMAP amplitude, and SNAP amplitude. Latency was adjusted for skin temperature deviation from reference. Pearson correlation coefficient (CC), intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), coefficient of variance (CoV), and relative intertrial variation (RIV) were calculated.ResultsFifteen subjects participated in either upper or lower extremity studies with nine participating in both. With the exception of CMAP amplitude, all parameters had CoV less than 0.06. Upper extremity amplitude parameters had CCs greater than 0.85. CCs for latencies were greater than 0.80 except for the median nerve FWL (CC = 0.69). For lower extremity nerves, ICCs were highest for mean FWL (>0.90), followed by DML (>0.82) and then CMAP (peroneal 0.33, tibial 0.73). The 10th to 90th RIV percentiles were bounded by ±7% for F-wave latencies; ±9% for all DSLs; and ±11% for DML (except peroneal at 15%).ConclusionsThe reproducibility of NCS parameters obtained with an automated NCS instrument compared favorably with traditional electromyography laboratories. F-wave latencies had the highest repeatability, followed by DML, DSL, SNAP and CMAP amplitude. Given their high reproducibility, automated NCS instrument may encourage wider utilization of NCS in clinical and research applications.

[1]  Morris A. Fisher Comparison of automated and manual F-wave latency measurements , 2005, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[2]  J. Albers,et al.  Reliability of nerve conduction studies among active workers , 1999, Muscle & nerve.

[3]  V. Bril,et al.  Electrophysiological monitoring in clinical trials , 1998 .

[4]  Xuan Kong,et al.  Electrodiagnostic automation: principles and practice. , 2005, Physical medicine and rehabilitation clinics of North America.

[5]  木村 淳 Electrodiagnosis in diseases of nerve and muscle : principles and practice , 1983 .

[6]  D Cros,et al.  Median neuropathy at the wrist: diagnostic utility of clinical findings and an automated electrodiagnostic device. , 2000, Journal of occupational and environmental medicine.

[7]  Peter J Dyck,et al.  Monotonicity of nerve tests in diabetes: subclinical nerve dysfunction precedes diagnosis of polyneuropathy. , 2005, Diabetes care.

[8]  J Kimura,et al.  Facts, fallacies, and fancies of nerve conduction studies: Twenty‐first annual Edward H. Lambert lecture , 1997, Muscle & nerve.

[9]  J. G. Dijk,et al.  Influence of recording site on CMAP amplitude and on its variation over a length of nerve , 1994, Muscle & nerve.

[10]  Xuan Kong,et al.  NC-stat sensory nerve conduction studies in the median and ulnar nerves of symptomatic patients , 2006, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[11]  J. van Dijk,et al.  Large electrodes improve nerve conduction repeatability in controls as well as in patients with diabetic neuropathy , 1996, Muscle & nerve.

[12]  R. Buschbacher,et al.  Electrodiagnosis in Diseases of Nerve and Muscle: Principles and Practice, 3rd Edition , 2003 .

[13]  John W. Day Electrodiagnosis in Diseases of Nerve and Muscle: Principles and Practice, 3rd edition Jun Kimura (Ed.); Oxford University Press, 2001, 9911 pages, hardback, ISBN 0-l9-512977-6, £105 , 2004, Neuromuscular Disorders.

[14]  J. Kimura,et al.  F-wave latency serves as the most reproducible measure in nerve conduction studies of diabetic polyneuropathy: multicentre analysis in healthy subjects and patients with diabetic polyneuropathy , 2000, Diabetologia.