MScanFit motor unit number estimation of human anconeus muscle

Exploring the effect of the nerve conduction distance on the MScanFit method ofmotor unit number estimation (MUNE)

OBJECTIVE

MScanFit motor unit number estimation (MUNE) is a sensitive method for detecting motor unit loss and has demonstrated high reproducibility in various settings. In this study, our aim was to assess the outputs of this method when the nerve conduction distance is increased.

METHODS

MScanFit recordings were obtained from the abductor digiti minimi muscle of 20 healthy volunteers. To evaluate the effect of nerve conduction distance, the ulnar nerve was stimulated from the wrist and elbow respectively. Reproducibility of MUNE, compound muscle action potential (CMAP), and other motor unit parameters were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).

RESULTS

Motor unit numbers obtained from stimulation at the wrist and elbow did not significantly differ and exhibited strong consistency in the ICC test (120.3 ± 23.7 vs. 118.5 ± 27.9, p > 0.05, ICC: 0.88). Similar repeatability values were noted for other parameters. However, the Largest Unit (%) displayed notable variability between the two regions and exhibited a negative correlation with nerve conduction distance.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that MScanFit can consistently calculate motor unit numbers and most of its outputs without substantial influence from nerve conduction distance. Exploring MScanFit's capabilities in various settings could enhance our understanding of its strengths and limitations for extensive use in clinical practice.

Effect of surface electrode recording area on compound muscle action potential scan processing for motor unit number estimation

Introduction

MScanFit is a model-based algorithm for motor unit number estimation (MUNE) from compound muscle action potential (CMAP) scan data. It is a clinically applicable tool because of its quick and automatic implementation. Electrodes with different recording areas were employed to record CMAP scan data in existing studies. However, the effect of electrode recording area on MScanFit MUNE and other CMAP scan parameters has not been studied.

Methods

CMAP scan was performed on the abductor pollicis brevis muscle of both hands on 14 healthy subjects using three different electrodes with recording areas of 10 mm × 10 mm, 11 mm × 14 mm, and 22 mm × 26 mm, respectively. Motor unit number was estimated using MScanFit for each CMAP scan. Two motor unit number index parameters, i.e., D50 and step index (STEPIX), were also derived from the CMAP scan data.

Results

No significant difference in D50, STEPIX, and MScanFit MUNE was observed across three different electrode recording areas, although the amplitude of CMAP decreased significantly when a larger electrode was used. Intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.792 and 0.782 were obtained for MScanFit MUNE and STEPIX, respectively.

Discussion

Compared with CMAP amplitude, D50, STEPIX, and MScanFit MUNE are less sensitive to variation in electrode recording area. However, the repeatability of MScanFit MUNE could be compromised by the inconsistency in the electrode recording area.

Estimation of the number of motor units in the human extensor digitorum brevis using MScanFit

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to determine the number and size parameters of EDB motor units in healthy young adults using MScanFit, a novel approach to motor unit number estimation (MUNE). Since variability in MUNE is related to compound muscle action potential (CMAP) size, we employed a procedure to document the optimal EDB electromyographic (EMG) electrode position prior to recording MUNE, a neglected practice in MUNE.

METHODS

Subjects were 21 adults 21-44 y. Maximum CMAPs were recorded from 9 sites in a 4 cm2 region centered over the EDB and the site with the largest amplitude was used in the MUNE experiment. For MUNE, the peroneal nerve was stimulated at the fibular head to produce a detailed EDB stimulus-response curve or "MScan". Motor unit number and size parameters underlying the MScan were simulated using the MScanFit mathematical model.

RESULTS

In 19 persons, the optimal recording site was superior, superior and proximal, or superior and distal to the EDB mid-belly, whereas in 3 persons it was proximal to the mid-belly. Ranges of key MScanFit parameters were as follows: maximum CMAP amplitude (3.1-8.5 mV), mean SMUP amplitude (34.4-106.7 μV), mean normalized SMUP amplitude (%CMAP max, 0.95-2.3%), largest SMUP amplitude (82.7-348 μV), and MUNE (43-103). MUNE was not related to maximum CMAP amplitude (R2 = 0.09), but was related to mean SMUP amplitude (R2 = -0.19, P = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The EDB CMAP was highly sensitive to electrode position, and the optimal position differed between subjects. Individual differences in EDB MUNE were not related to CMAP amplitude. Inter-subject variability of EDB MUNE (coefficient of variation) was much less than previously reported, possibly explained by better optimization of the EMG electrode and the unique approach of MScanFit MUNE.

Estimating motor unit numbers from a CMAP scan: Repeatability study on three muscles at 15 centres

OBJECTIVE

To assess the repeatability and suitability for multicentre studies of MScanFit motor unit number estimation (MUNE), which involves modelling compound muscle action potential (CMAP) scans.

METHODS

Fifteen groups in 9 countries recorded CMAP scans twice, 1-2 weeks apart in healthy subjects from abductor pollicis brevis (APB), abductor digiti minimi (ADM) and tibialis anterior (TA) muscles. The original MScanFit program (MScanFit-1) was compared with a revised version (MScanFit-2), designed to accommodate different muscles and recording conditions by setting the minimal motor unit size as a function of maximum CMAP.

RESULTS

Complete sets of 6 recordings were obtained from 148 subjects. CMAP amplitudes differed significantly between centres for all muscles, and the same was true for MScanFit-1 MUNE. With MScanFit-2, MUNE differed less between centres but remained significantly different for APB. Coefficients of variation between repeats were 18.0% for ADM, 16.8% for APB, and 12.1% for TA.

CONCLUSIONS

It is recommended for multicentre studies to use MScanFit-2 for analysis. TA provided the least variable MUNE values between subjects and the most repeatable within subjects.

SIGNIFICANCE

MScanFit was primarily devised to model the discontinuities in CMAP scans in patients and is less suitable for healthy subjects with smooth scans.

Feasibility and reliability of MScanFit motor unit number estimation in peroneus longus muscle

INTRODUCTION/AIM

Motor unit number estimation (MUNE) methods may be valuable to detect motor involvement earlier than compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitude. The most recent MUNE method, MScanFit has been shown to have advantages compared to the previously described methods. However, MScanFit has only been applied in a few lower extremity muscles. We aimed in this study to examine the feasibility and reliability of MScanFit in peroneus longus muscle.

METHODS

Twenty healthy controls (16 males and 4 females, mean age: 36.05 ± 2.58) were examined twice within a 1-2 week interval. Fibular nerve was stimulated at the knee and CMAP scans were recorded from peroneus longus muscle. From this, MScanFit MUNE and size parameters were calculated as well as the CMAP amplitude. The reliability was examined using coefficient of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). MUNE was correlated with CMAP amplitude using linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

The CV between sessions was higher for CMAP amplitude (11.63 ± 1.88 %) than MScanFit MUNE (3.13 ± 0.78%). Among the size parameters, mean unit amplitude (μV) showed the lowest CV (11.46 % ± 1.77). Using ICC, CMAP amplitude exhibited good reliability (0.787) whereas that of MScanFit MUNE was excellent (0.902). Reliability was good for all size parameters. There was no significant correlation between MScanFit MUNE and CMAP amplitude (R= 0.25, p>0.05).

DISCUSSION

MScanFit MUNE is feasible in the peroneus longus muscle with high test-retest reliability in healthy subjects. Studies in patients are needed to examine the sensitivity of this muscle in disease. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.