Stimulus artifact removal in EMG from muscles adjacent to stimulated muscles

When stimulating muscles, EMG signals recorded in neighboring muscles can be contaminated by stimulus artifacts, and artifact deletion is necessary. We have devised a digital technique for removing stimulus artifacts from rectified EMG recordings in muscles which lie close to a stimulated muscle. This artifact deletion method replaces the rectified EMG during the artifact interval with an estimate of the rectified EMG. Our research requires detection of very small changes in EMG levels. Therefore, the artifact deletion technique described in this paper was designed to leave less than 10 microV of artifact in the rectified EMG post-processing. This technique relies on being able to estimate the artifact duration. Since stimulated muscles have M-waves that can overlap with artifacts, our technique is only appropriate for removing artifacts in muscles which are not being stimulated. Unlike other artifact elimination techniques, our technique does not change the mean value of the rectified EMG, regardless of artifact width. In addition, it provides a more accurate estimate of the rectified EMG during the artifact interval as opposed to sample-and-hold techniques.

[1]  H J Spencer.  An automatic, optically isolated, biphasic constant current stimulator adapter for artefact suppression. , 1981, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[2]  J. A. Freeman.  An electronic stimulus artifact suppressor. , 1971, Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology.

[3]  B. Widrow,et al.  On the Nature and Elimination of Stimulus Artifact in Nerve Signals Evoked and Recorded Using Surface Electrodes , 1982, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[4]  T L Babb,et al.  A sample and hold amplifier system for stimulus artifact suppression. , 1978, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[5]  L. Schwirtlich,et al.  Sensory feed-back in hybrid orthotic system , 1989, Images of the Twenty-First Century. Proceedings of the Annual International Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society,.

[6]  A. E. Hines,et al.  Hand opening by electrical stimulation in patients with spastic hemiplegia , 1995 .

[7]  Graeme M. Clark,et al.  A gated differential amplifier for recording physiological responses to electrical stimulation , 1992, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[8]  D. D. Walker,et al.  A fast-recovery electrode amplifier for electrophysiology. , 1978, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[9]  Peter Shizgal,et al.  Improved artifact rejection and isolation of compound action potentials by means of digital subtraction , 1989, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[10]  R J Roby,et al.  A simplified circuit for stimulus artifact suppression. , 1975, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[11]  R. Merletti,et al.  Suppression of stimulation artifacts from myoelectric-evoked potential recordings , 1988, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[12]  T Blogg,et al.  A digital technique for stimulus artifact reduction. , 1990, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[13]  R. Merletti,et al.  Electrically evoked myoelectric signals. , 1992, Critical reviews in biomedical engineering.

[14]  N. Hoshimiya,et al.  Development Of An FES System Controlled By EMG Signals , 1990, [1990] Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[15]  G W Harding,et al.  A method for eliminating the stimulus artifact from digital recordings of the direct cortical response. , 1991, Computers and biomedical research, an international journal.