The influence of the reference electrode location on the M−wave characteristics in the quadriceps. (October 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Rodriguez-Falces, Javier; Etxaleku, Saioa; Setuain, Igor; Malanda, Armando; Navallas, Javier
• Is Part Of: Journal of electromyography and kinesiology. Volume 66(2022)
• Publication Date: 2022-10
• Subjects: Belly-tendon configuration -- Reference electrode -- Active electrode -- Compound muscle action potential -- M wave -- Volume conduction -- Far-field potentials; Electromyography -- Periodicals; Kinesiology -- Periodicals; Electromyography -- Periodicals; Movement -- physiology -- Periodicals; Muscles -- physiology -- Periodicals; Électromyographie -- Périodiques; Cinésiologie -- Périodiques; Electromyography; Kinesiology; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 616.740757
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2022.102681
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1050-6411

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: In the compound muscle action potential (M wave) recorded using the belly-tendon configuration, the contribution of the tendon electrode is assumed to be negligible compared to the belly electrode. We tested this assumption by placing the reference electrode at a distant (contralateral) site, which allowed separate recording of the belly and tendon contributions. Methods: M waves were recorded at multiple selected sites over the right quadriceps heads and lower leg using two different locations for the reference electrode: the ipsilateral (right) and contralateral (left) patellar tendon. The general parameters of the M wave (amplitude, area, duration, latency, and frequency) were measured. Results: (1) The tendon potential had a small amplitude (<30%) compared to the belly potential; (2) Changing the reference electrode from the ipsilateral to the contralateral patella produced moderate changes in the M wave recorded over the innervation zone, these changes affecting significantly the amplitude of the M−wave second phase (p = 0.006); (3) Using the contralateral reference system allowed recording of short-latency components occurring immediately after the stimulus artefact, which had the same latency and amplitude (p = 0.18 and 0.25, respectively) at all recording sites over the leg. Conclusions: The potential recorded at the "tendon" site after femoral nerve stimulation is small (compared to the belly potential), but not negligible, and makes a significant contribution to the second phase of belly-tendon M wave. Adopting a distant (contralateral) reference allowed recording of far-field components that may aid in the understanding of the electrical formation of the M wave.