Extramuscular Recording of Spontaneous EMG Activity and Transcranial Electrical Elicited Motor Potentials in Horses: Characteristics of Different Subcutaneous and Surface Electrode Types and Practical Guidelines
IntroductionAdhesive surface electrodes are worthwhile to explore in detail as alternative to subcutaneous needle electrodes to assess myogenic evoked potentials (MEP) in human and horses. Extramuscular characteristics of both electrode types and different brands are compared in simultaneous recordi...
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2020-07-01
|
Series: | Frontiers in Neuroscience |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnins.2020.00652/full |
id |
doaj-95e566c195814debb47fbeb485dffbe7 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-95e566c195814debb47fbeb485dffbe72020-11-25T03:31:13ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Neuroscience1662-453X2020-07-011410.3389/fnins.2020.00652538895Extramuscular Recording of Spontaneous EMG Activity and Transcranial Electrical Elicited Motor Potentials in Horses: Characteristics of Different Subcutaneous and Surface Electrode Types and Practical GuidelinesSanne Lotte Journée0Sanne Lotte Journée1Henricus Louis Journée2Henricus Louis Journée3Stephen Michael Reed4Stephen Michael Reed5Hanneke Irene Berends6Cornelis Marinus de Bruijn7Cathérine John Ghislaine Delesalle8Equine Diagnostics, Wyns, NetherlandsResearch Group of Comparative Physiology, Department of Virology, Parasitology and Immunology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Merelbeke, BelgiumDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, NetherlandsDepartment of Orthopedics, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, NetherlandsRood & Riddle Equine Hospital, Lexington, KY, United StatesM.H. Gluck Equine Research Center, Department of Veterinary Science, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, United StatesDepartment of Orthopedics, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, NetherlandsWolvega Equine Clinic, Oldeholtpade, NetherlandsResearch Group of Comparative Physiology, Department of Virology, Parasitology and Immunology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Ghent University, Merelbeke, BelgiumIntroductionAdhesive surface electrodes are worthwhile to explore in detail as alternative to subcutaneous needle electrodes to assess myogenic evoked potentials (MEP) in human and horses. Extramuscular characteristics of both electrode types and different brands are compared in simultaneous recordings by also considering electrode impedances and background noise under not mechanically secured (not taped) and taped conditions.MethodsIn five ataxic and one non-ataxic horses, transcranial electrical MEPs, myographic activity, and noise were simultaneously recorded from subcutaneous needle (three brands) together with pre-gelled surface electrodes (five brands) on four extremities. In three horses, the impedances of four adjacent-placed surface-electrode pairs of different brands were measured and compared. The similarity between needle and surface EMGs was assessed by cross-correlation functions, pairwise comparison of motor latency times (MLT), and amplitudes. The influence of electrode noise and impedance on the signal quality was assessed by a failure rate (FR) function. Geometric means and impedance ranges under not taped and taped conditions were derived for each brand.ResultsHigh coherencies between EMGs of needle-surface pairs degraded to 0.7 at moderate and disappeared at strong noise. MLTs showed sub-millisecond simultaneous differences while sequential variations were several milliseconds. Subcutaneous MEP amplitudes were somewhat lower than epidermal. The impedances of subcutaneous needle electrodes were below 900 Ω and FR = 0. For four brands, the FR for surface electrodes was between 0 and 80% and declined to below 25% after taping. A remaining brand (27G DSN2260 Medtronic) revealed impedances over 100 kΩ and FR = 100% under not taped and taped conditions.ConclusionSubcutaneous needle and surface electrodes yield highly coherent EMGs and TES–MEP signals. When taped and allowing sufficient settling time, adhesive surface-electrode signals may approach the signal quality of subcutaneous needle electrodes but still depend on unpredictable conditions of the skin. The study provides a new valuable practical guidance for selection of extramuscular EMG electrodes. This study on horses shares common principles for the choice of adhesive surface or sc needle electrodes in human applications such as in intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring of motor functions of the brain and spinal cord.https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnins.2020.00652/fulltranscranial stimulationequine neurologyelectromyographysubcutaneous electrodessurface electrodes |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Sanne Lotte Journée Sanne Lotte Journée Henricus Louis Journée Henricus Louis Journée Stephen Michael Reed Stephen Michael Reed Hanneke Irene Berends Cornelis Marinus de Bruijn Cathérine John Ghislaine Delesalle |
spellingShingle |
Sanne Lotte Journée Sanne Lotte Journée Henricus Louis Journée Henricus Louis Journée Stephen Michael Reed Stephen Michael Reed Hanneke Irene Berends Cornelis Marinus de Bruijn Cathérine John Ghislaine Delesalle Extramuscular Recording of Spontaneous EMG Activity and Transcranial Electrical Elicited Motor Potentials in Horses: Characteristics of Different Subcutaneous and Surface Electrode Types and Practical Guidelines Frontiers in Neuroscience transcranial stimulation equine neurology electromyography subcutaneous electrodes surface electrodes |
author_facet |
Sanne Lotte Journée Sanne Lotte Journée Henricus Louis Journée Henricus Louis Journée Stephen Michael Reed Stephen Michael Reed Hanneke Irene Berends Cornelis Marinus de Bruijn Cathérine John Ghislaine Delesalle |
author_sort |
Sanne Lotte Journée |
title |
Extramuscular Recording of Spontaneous EMG Activity and Transcranial Electrical Elicited Motor Potentials in Horses: Characteristics of Different Subcutaneous and Surface Electrode Types and Practical Guidelines |
title_short |
Extramuscular Recording of Spontaneous EMG Activity and Transcranial Electrical Elicited Motor Potentials in Horses: Characteristics of Different Subcutaneous and Surface Electrode Types and Practical Guidelines |
title_full |
Extramuscular Recording of Spontaneous EMG Activity and Transcranial Electrical Elicited Motor Potentials in Horses: Characteristics of Different Subcutaneous and Surface Electrode Types and Practical Guidelines |
title_fullStr |
Extramuscular Recording of Spontaneous EMG Activity and Transcranial Electrical Elicited Motor Potentials in Horses: Characteristics of Different Subcutaneous and Surface Electrode Types and Practical Guidelines |
title_full_unstemmed |
Extramuscular Recording of Spontaneous EMG Activity and Transcranial Electrical Elicited Motor Potentials in Horses: Characteristics of Different Subcutaneous and Surface Electrode Types and Practical Guidelines |
title_sort |
extramuscular recording of spontaneous emg activity and transcranial electrical elicited motor potentials in horses: characteristics of different subcutaneous and surface electrode types and practical guidelines |
publisher |
Frontiers Media S.A. |
series |
Frontiers in Neuroscience |
issn |
1662-453X |
publishDate |
2020-07-01 |
description |
IntroductionAdhesive surface electrodes are worthwhile to explore in detail as alternative to subcutaneous needle electrodes to assess myogenic evoked potentials (MEP) in human and horses. Extramuscular characteristics of both electrode types and different brands are compared in simultaneous recordings by also considering electrode impedances and background noise under not mechanically secured (not taped) and taped conditions.MethodsIn five ataxic and one non-ataxic horses, transcranial electrical MEPs, myographic activity, and noise were simultaneously recorded from subcutaneous needle (three brands) together with pre-gelled surface electrodes (five brands) on four extremities. In three horses, the impedances of four adjacent-placed surface-electrode pairs of different brands were measured and compared. The similarity between needle and surface EMGs was assessed by cross-correlation functions, pairwise comparison of motor latency times (MLT), and amplitudes. The influence of electrode noise and impedance on the signal quality was assessed by a failure rate (FR) function. Geometric means and impedance ranges under not taped and taped conditions were derived for each brand.ResultsHigh coherencies between EMGs of needle-surface pairs degraded to 0.7 at moderate and disappeared at strong noise. MLTs showed sub-millisecond simultaneous differences while sequential variations were several milliseconds. Subcutaneous MEP amplitudes were somewhat lower than epidermal. The impedances of subcutaneous needle electrodes were below 900 Ω and FR = 0. For four brands, the FR for surface electrodes was between 0 and 80% and declined to below 25% after taping. A remaining brand (27G DSN2260 Medtronic) revealed impedances over 100 kΩ and FR = 100% under not taped and taped conditions.ConclusionSubcutaneous needle and surface electrodes yield highly coherent EMGs and TES–MEP signals. When taped and allowing sufficient settling time, adhesive surface-electrode signals may approach the signal quality of subcutaneous needle electrodes but still depend on unpredictable conditions of the skin. The study provides a new valuable practical guidance for selection of extramuscular EMG electrodes. This study on horses shares common principles for the choice of adhesive surface or sc needle electrodes in human applications such as in intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring of motor functions of the brain and spinal cord. |
topic |
transcranial stimulation equine neurology electromyography subcutaneous electrodes surface electrodes |
url |
https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnins.2020.00652/full |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT sannelottejournee extramuscularrecordingofspontaneousemgactivityandtranscranialelectricalelicitedmotorpotentialsinhorsescharacteristicsofdifferentsubcutaneousandsurfaceelectrodetypesandpracticalguidelines AT sannelottejournee extramuscularrecordingofspontaneousemgactivityandtranscranialelectricalelicitedmotorpotentialsinhorsescharacteristicsofdifferentsubcutaneousandsurfaceelectrodetypesandpracticalguidelines AT henricuslouisjournee extramuscularrecordingofspontaneousemgactivityandtranscranialelectricalelicitedmotorpotentialsinhorsescharacteristicsofdifferentsubcutaneousandsurfaceelectrodetypesandpracticalguidelines AT henricuslouisjournee extramuscularrecordingofspontaneousemgactivityandtranscranialelectricalelicitedmotorpotentialsinhorsescharacteristicsofdifferentsubcutaneousandsurfaceelectrodetypesandpracticalguidelines AT stephenmichaelreed extramuscularrecordingofspontaneousemgactivityandtranscranialelectricalelicitedmotorpotentialsinhorsescharacteristicsofdifferentsubcutaneousandsurfaceelectrodetypesandpracticalguidelines AT stephenmichaelreed extramuscularrecordingofspontaneousemgactivityandtranscranialelectricalelicitedmotorpotentialsinhorsescharacteristicsofdifferentsubcutaneousandsurfaceelectrodetypesandpracticalguidelines AT hannekeireneberends extramuscularrecordingofspontaneousemgactivityandtranscranialelectricalelicitedmotorpotentialsinhorsescharacteristicsofdifferentsubcutaneousandsurfaceelectrodetypesandpracticalguidelines AT cornelismarinusdebruijn extramuscularrecordingofspontaneousemgactivityandtranscranialelectricalelicitedmotorpotentialsinhorsescharacteristicsofdifferentsubcutaneousandsurfaceelectrodetypesandpracticalguidelines AT catherinejohnghislainedelesalle extramuscularrecordingofspontaneousemgactivityandtranscranialelectricalelicitedmotorpotentialsinhorsescharacteristicsofdifferentsubcutaneousandsurfaceelectrodetypesandpracticalguidelines |
_version_ |
1724572828262465536 |