What determines the latency and amplitude of stationary peaks in far‐field recordings?

Jun Kimura, Akio Kimura, Tetsuro Ishida, Yutaka Kudo, Shoji Suzuki, Masafumi Machida, Hiroo Matsuoka, Thoru Yamada

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

37 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In 20 radial nerves from 10 healthy persons, a referential derivation from the tip of the first or second digit registered two biphasic stationary peaks, PI‐NI and PII‐NII, following stimulation of the nerve in the forearm. These two peaks occurred slightly before the arrival of the propagating impulse at the wrist and at the base of the digit, respectively. With stepwise reduction of stimulation from a maximal to a threshold intensity, the far‐field potential decreased in amplitude linearly with the near‐field potential recorded at the junction of the volume conductor. Abduction of the first digit or flexion of the second and third digits altered the waveform and, to a lesser degree, the latency of the farfield peaks. However, these changes appeared in an inconsistent manner, which we were unable to characterize. We conclude that in far‐field recording a stationary peak results at the border of the adjoining volume conductors in proportion to the magnitude of the propagating axonal volley approaching the boundary.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)479-486
Number of pages8
JournalAnnals of Neurology
Volume19
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1986 May

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neurology
  • Clinical Neurology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'What determines the latency and amplitude of stationary peaks in far‐field recordings?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this