O25 Motor unit number estimation methods compared to quantitative motor unit potential analysis in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

To compare the sensitivity of MUNE methods to quantitative motor unit potential (MUP) analysis in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Twenty-four patients (1 definite, 11 probable and 8 possible ALS according to awaji criteria as reference standard, and 4 progressive muscular atrophy) were included...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Clinical neurophysiology 2017-09, Vol.128 (9), p.e188-e188
Main Authors: Kristensen, Rikke Soegaard, Jacobsen, Anna Bystrup, Fuglsang-Frederiksen, Anders, Tankisi, Hatice
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
MScan
Multipoint stimulation MUNE
MUNE
MUNIX
MUP analysis
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To compare the sensitivity of MUNE methods to quantitative motor unit potential (MUP) analysis in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Twenty-four patients (1 definite, 11 probable and 8 possible ALS according to awaji criteria as reference standard, and 4 progressive muscular atrophy) were included. Patients were evaluated by revised ALS functional rating scale (ALSFRS-R). In all patients, quantitative MUP analysis and three MUNE methods; MScanFit MUNA (MScan), multiple point stimulation MUNE (MPS), and Motor Unit Number Index (MUNIX) were done in abductor pollicis brevis (APB). MUNE results were compared to 20 age-matched healthy controls and EMG to laboratory controls. The sensitivity of each methods was compared using McNemar chi-square test. MUNE values and MUP parameters were correlated to ALSFRS-R by regression analysis. MScan (70%) and MPS (61%) more frequently showed abnormality than MUP duration (35%) whereas only MScan was more often abnormal than MUP amplitude (39%) (p
ISSN:1388-2457
1872-8952
DOI:10.1016/j.clinph.2017.07.036