Key result
Thoracic surface recordings underestimate diaphragm EMG frequencies by ~28% versus esophageal recordings.
Why the study?
Do chest surface leads accurately reflect diaphragm EMG centroid frequencies compared to esophageal leads in quadriplegic patients?
Observational (n=11)
Do chest surface leads accurately reflect diaphragm EMG centroid frequencies compared to esophageal leads in quadriplegic patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 62.6% vs 86.9%
Thoracic surface recordings of the diaphragmatic EMG yield spuriously low centroid frequencies and do not accurately reflect frequency information compared to esophageal recordings.
Surface diaphragm EMG underestimates centroid frequencies and should not guide assessment in quadriplegia; leaves open whether corrected signals can be validated.
Previous work has suggested that diaphragm EMGs recorded from the lower thoracic wall yield spuriously low centroid frequencies (Fc). For this reason we compared EMGs recorded from two anterolateral thoracic wall locations with EMGs recorded simultaneously from a bipolar esophageal electrode in 11 stable quadriplegic patients. Their maximal inspiratory pressures (Pdimax) ranged from 31 to 85, averaging 55 cm H2O. Quadriplegic patients were selected to exclude EMG contamination of surface recordings by intercostal muscle activity. Recordings were made during resting breathing, voluntary hyperventilation, CO2-stimulated hyperventilation, and inspiratory resistance breathing at 50% of Pdimax. Centroid frequencies were consistently lower from surface recordings than from esophageal recordings. Centroid frequencies (Hz) recorded from the esophagus were 86.9 +/- 3.0 (SEM) resting, 93.4 +/- 3.7 during voluntary hyperventilation, 85.8 +/- 4.2 during CO2-stimulated ventilation, and 88.5 +/- 1.4 during inspiratory resistance breathing. Corresponding Fc values from simultaneous thoracic surface recordings were 62.6 +/- 3.6, 62.0 +/- 2.8, 58.6 +/- 3.1, and 58.8 +/- 2.5. On several subjects, decreases in Fc that occurred during sustained maximal inspiratory efforts were present in esophageal recordings but not in surface recordings. We conclude that thoracic surface recordings of the diaphragmatic EMG do not accurately reflect frequency information.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sharp et al. (1993) conducted an observational in Stable quadriplegia (n=11). Thoracic surface EMG leads vs. Bipolar esophageal electrode was evaluated on Diaphragm EMG centroid frequencies during resting breathing. Thoracic surface recordings yielded consistently lower diaphragm EMG centroid frequencies compared to esophageal recordings (e.g., 62.6 vs 86.9 Hz at rest), failing to accurately reflect frequency.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: