Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society · 2020
Does Essential Tremor Alter the Axonal Excitability Properties of Lower Motor Neurons?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kim Yerim, Kim Young Eun, Lee Joo Young, Ma Hyeo-Il, Shim Soon Kyung, Yoon Sun Min, Bae Jong Seok
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Automated nerve excitability testing has identified that the altered excitability of lower motor neuron (LMN) axons in central diseases is because of trans-synaptic plasticity. Essential tremor (ET) is considered a central disorder caused by an altered cerebellar circuit. This study aimed to identify alterations in the excitability of distal motor axons in subjects with ET, with the intention of clarifying whether a trans-synaptic mechanism or LMN adaptation for tremor affects the LMNs of subjects with ET.
METHODS: Twenty-one consecutive patients diagnosed with ET underwent a clinical and electrophysiological evaluation. For the enrolled cases and 45 age- and gender-matched healthy controls, automated nerve excitability testing with threshold tracking techniques (QTRACS software with TRONDF multiple-excitability protocol) was used to evaluate multiple nerve excitability indices in distal median nerve motor axons.
RESULTS: The automated protocol calculated the strength-duration time constant, parameters of threshold electrotonus and current-threshold relationship, and the recovery cycle of excitability. Comparisons of the automated nerve excitability testing parameters revealed no significant differences between the ET and control groups in any of strength-duration time constant, threshold electrotonus, current-threshold relationship, and recovery cycle, whereas the rheobase was higher in the ET group (3.4 ± 1.1 vs. 2.3 ± 1.1, mean ± standard error mean; P < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: With the exception of an increased rheobase in ET subjects, no significant differences were observed in LMN excitability between the ET subjects and their controls. The extent of plasticity or adaptation in LMNs may be limited to a major change in central processes that exert marked effects on the pool of LMNs.
METHODS: Twenty-one consecutive patients diagnosed with ET underwent a clinical and electrophysiological evaluation. For the enrolled cases and 45 age- and gender-matched healthy controls, automated nerve excitability testing with threshold tracking techniques (QTRACS software with TRONDF multiple-excitability protocol) was used to evaluate multiple nerve excitability indices in distal median nerve motor axons.
RESULTS: The automated protocol calculated the strength-duration time constant, parameters of threshold electrotonus and current-threshold relationship, and the recovery cycle of excitability. Comparisons of the automated nerve excitability testing parameters revealed no significant differences between the ET and control groups in any of strength-duration time constant, threshold electrotonus, current-threshold relationship, and recovery cycle, whereas the rheobase was higher in the ET group (3.4 ± 1.1 vs. 2.3 ± 1.1, mean ± standard error mean; P < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: With the exception of an increased rheobase in ET subjects, no significant differences were observed in LMN excitability between the ET subjects and their controls. The extent of plasticity or adaptation in LMNs may be limited to a major change in central processes that exert marked effects on the pool of LMNs.