{"title":"正中神经和胫神经体感诱发电位:来自人类次级体感皮层附近的中潜伏期成分","authors":"C Kany, R.-D Treede","doi":"10.1016/S0168-5597(97)00045-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span><span>The topography of the middle-latency N110 after radial nerve stimulation<span><span> suggested a generator in SII. To support this hypothesis, we have tried to identify a homologous component in the tibial nerve SEP (somatosensory evoked potential). </span>Evoked potentials following tibial nerve stimulation (motor+sensory threshold) were recorded with 29 electrodes (bandpass 0.5–500 Hz, sampling rate 1000 Hz). For comparison, the </span></span>median nerve<span> was stimulated at the wrist. Components were identified as peaks in the global field power (GFP). Map series were generated around GFP peaks and amplitudes were measured from electrodes near map maxima. With median nerve stimulation, we recorded a negativity with a maximum in temporal electrode positions and 106±12 ms peak latency (mean±SD), comparable to the N110 following radial nerve stimulation. After tibial nerve stimulation the latency of a component with the same topography was 131±11 ms (N130). Both N110 and N130 were present ipsi- as well as contralaterally. Amplitudes were significantly higher on the contralateral than the ipsilateral scalp for both median (3.1±2.4 </span></span><em>μ</em>V vs. 1.7±1.6 <em>μ</em>V) and tibial nerve (1.9±1.2 <em>μ</em>V vs. 0.6+1 <em>μ</em>V). The topography of the N130 can be explained by a generator in the vicinity of SII. The latency difference between median and tibial nerve stimulation is related to the longer conduction distance (cf. N20 and P40). The smaller ipsilateral N130 is consistent with the bilateral body representation in SII.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100401,"journal":{"name":"Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section","volume":"104 5","pages":"Pages 402-410"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1997-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0168-5597(97)00045-2","citationCount":"47","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Median and tibial nerve somatosensory evoked potentials: middle-latency components from the vicinity of the secondary somatosensory cortex in humans\",\"authors\":\"C Kany, R.-D Treede\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/S0168-5597(97)00045-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span><span>The topography of the middle-latency N110 after radial nerve stimulation<span><span> suggested a generator in SII. To support this hypothesis, we have tried to identify a homologous component in the tibial nerve SEP (somatosensory evoked potential). </span>Evoked potentials following tibial nerve stimulation (motor+sensory threshold) were recorded with 29 electrodes (bandpass 0.5–500 Hz, sampling rate 1000 Hz). For comparison, the </span></span>median nerve<span> was stimulated at the wrist. Components were identified as peaks in the global field power (GFP). Map series were generated around GFP peaks and amplitudes were measured from electrodes near map maxima. With median nerve stimulation, we recorded a negativity with a maximum in temporal electrode positions and 106±12 ms peak latency (mean±SD), comparable to the N110 following radial nerve stimulation. After tibial nerve stimulation the latency of a component with the same topography was 131±11 ms (N130). Both N110 and N130 were present ipsi- as well as contralaterally. Amplitudes were significantly higher on the contralateral than the ipsilateral scalp for both median (3.1±2.4 </span></span><em>μ</em>V vs. 1.7±1.6 <em>μ</em>V) and tibial nerve (1.9±1.2 <em>μ</em>V vs. 0.6+1 <em>μ</em>V). The topography of the N130 can be explained by a generator in the vicinity of SII. The latency difference between median and tibial nerve stimulation is related to the longer conduction distance (cf. N20 and P40). The smaller ipsilateral N130 is consistent with the bilateral body representation in SII.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100401,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section\",\"volume\":\"104 5\",\"pages\":\"Pages 402-410\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1997-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0168-5597(97)00045-2\",\"citationCount\":\"47\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168559797000452\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168559797000452","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 47
摘要
桡神经刺激后中潜伏期N110的地形图提示SII中有一个发生器。为了支持这一假设,我们试图在胫神经SEP(体感诱发电位)中识别一个同源成分。29个电极(带通0.5 ~ 500 Hz,采样率1000 Hz)记录胫骨神经刺激(运动+感觉阈值)后的诱发电位。作为对比,我们在手腕处刺激正中神经。组分被确定为全球场功率(GFP)的峰值。在GFP峰值周围生成一系列图,并在图最大值附近的电极上测量振幅。在正中神经刺激下,我们记录了颞电极位置的最大负性和106±12 ms的峰值潜伏期(平均±SD),与桡神经刺激后的N110相当。胫骨神经刺激后,具有相同地形的部位潜伏期为131±11 ms (N130)。N110和N130在单侧和对侧均存在。对侧头皮正中神经(3.1±2.4 μV vs. 1.7±1.6 μV)和胫神经(1.9±1.2 μV vs. 0.6+1 μV)的振幅均显著高于同侧头皮。N130的地形可以用SII附近的发电机来解释。正中神经和胫神经刺激的潜伏期差异与较长的传导距离有关(参见N20和P40)。较小的同侧N130与SII的双侧体表征一致。
Median and tibial nerve somatosensory evoked potentials: middle-latency components from the vicinity of the secondary somatosensory cortex in humans
The topography of the middle-latency N110 after radial nerve stimulation suggested a generator in SII. To support this hypothesis, we have tried to identify a homologous component in the tibial nerve SEP (somatosensory evoked potential). Evoked potentials following tibial nerve stimulation (motor+sensory threshold) were recorded with 29 electrodes (bandpass 0.5–500 Hz, sampling rate 1000 Hz). For comparison, the median nerve was stimulated at the wrist. Components were identified as peaks in the global field power (GFP). Map series were generated around GFP peaks and amplitudes were measured from electrodes near map maxima. With median nerve stimulation, we recorded a negativity with a maximum in temporal electrode positions and 106±12 ms peak latency (mean±SD), comparable to the N110 following radial nerve stimulation. After tibial nerve stimulation the latency of a component with the same topography was 131±11 ms (N130). Both N110 and N130 were present ipsi- as well as contralaterally. Amplitudes were significantly higher on the contralateral than the ipsilateral scalp for both median (3.1±2.4 μV vs. 1.7±1.6 μV) and tibial nerve (1.9±1.2 μV vs. 0.6+1 μV). The topography of the N130 can be explained by a generator in the vicinity of SII. The latency difference between median and tibial nerve stimulation is related to the longer conduction distance (cf. N20 and P40). The smaller ipsilateral N130 is consistent with the bilateral body representation in SII.