Myo-Neurografie 1990–2020 entlang der „Wissenspunkte für die EMG-Prüfung“ der DGKN

Wilhelm J. Schulte-Mattler

doi:10.1055/a-1305-0863

Klinische Neurophysiologie, Table of Contents

Klinische Neurophysiologie 2021; 52(02): 87-91
DOI: 10.1055/a-1305-0863

Übersicht

Myo-Neurografie 1990–2020 entlang der „Wissenspunkte für die EMG-Prüfung“ der DGKN

Myo-Neurography 1990–2020 along the “Knowledge Items for the EMG-Certificate” of the German Neurophysiological Society (DGKN)

Wilhelm J. Schulte-Mattler

Klinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und
Psychotherapie der Universität Regensburg, Zentrum für Altersmedizin, Regensburg

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Zusammenfassung

Die „Wissenspunkte für die EMG-Prüfung“ der DGKN (https://dgkn.de/images/richtlinien/RL18_EMG_Wissenpunkte.pdf) sind zuletzt vor 10 Jahren bearbeitet worden. Diese letzte Aktualisierung hatte nur zu geringen Änderungen geführt. Fast alle dieser Punkte sind so im Wesentlichen unverändert aufgelistet, seit der Autor dieser Zeilen EMG betreibt, also seit mehr als 30 Jahren. Hier soll der Versuch unternommen werden, anhand dieser Punkte aufzuzeigen, was sich in dieser Zeit verändert hat, was neu ist, aber auch, was weggefallen ist – oder wegfallen sollte.

Abstract

The “knowledge points” for the EMG certificate of the DGKN (https://dgkn.de/images/bedingungen/RL18_EMG_Wissenpunkte.pdf) were last edited 10 years ago. This last update made only minor changes. Almost all of these points are listed essentially unchanged since the author of these lines has been running EMG, i. e. for more than 30 years. This article attempts to use these points to show what has changed during this time, what is new, but also what was left behind – or should be left behind.

Schlüsselwörter

Electromyographie - Neurographie - DGKN-Zertifikat - Nervenleitgeschwindigkeit - Leitungsblock

Keywords

Electromyography - Neurography - DGKN-certificate - nerve conduction velocity - conduction block

Full Text

References

Literatur
1 Daroff RB, Rossi A, Stevens-Ross LM, Rowland LP. Suggestions to authors. Neurology 1994; 44: 184
2 The perimeters of parameters Neurology 1984; 34: 1591
3 Tankisi H, Burke D, Cui L, Md Carvalho, Kuwabara S, Nandedkar SD, Rutkove S, StåLberg E, van Putten MJAM, Fuglsang-Frederiksen A. Standards of instrumentation of EMG. Clin Neurophysiol 2020; 131: 243-258
4 Lange-Maia BS, Cauley JA, Newman AB, Boudreau RM, Jakicic JM, Glynn NW, Zivkovic S, Dam T-TL, Caserotti P, Cawthon PM, Orwoll ES, Strotmeyer ES. Sensorimotor Peripheral Nerve Function and Physical Activity in Older Men. J Aging Phys Act 2016; 24: 559-566
5 Hanewinckel R, Drenthen J, van Oijen M, Hofman A, van Doorn PA, Ikram MA. Prevalence of polyneuropathy in the general middle-aged and elderly population. Neurology 2016; 87: 1892-1898
6 Buchner H, Schönlau L, Ferbert A. Neurografie des N. Suralis. Klin Neurophysiol 2018; 49: 188-207
7 Schulte-Mattler W. Conduction Velocity Distribution. In: Kimura J. Neurophysiology of Peripheral Nerve Diseases. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2006: 405-419
8 Busch V, Schulte-Mattler WJ. Differentiation between uniform and non-uniform motor nerve conduction slowing. Clin Neurophysiol 2010; 121: 890-894
9 Elzenheimer E, Laufs H, Schulte-Mattler W, Schmidt G. Signal Modeling and Simulation of Temporal Dispersion and Conduction Block in Motor Nerves. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2020; 67: 2094-2102
10 Kanbayashi T, Yamauchi T, Miyaji Y, Sonoo M. Investigation of anodal stimulation and its implications for F-wave examinations. Muscle & nerve 2017; 56: 51-56
11 Young MS, Triggs WJ. Effect of stimulator orientation on F-wave persistence. Muscle Nerve 1998; 21: 1324-1326
12 London ZN. Safety and pain in electrodiagnostic studies. Muscle & nerve 2017; 55: 149-159
13 Rösler K. Nadelmyografische Untersuchungen antikoagulierter Patienten, unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der neuen oralen Antikoagulanzien. Klin Neurophysiol 2015; 46: 2-8
14 Robinson LR, Christie M, Nandedkar S. A message from the ground electrode. Muscle & nerve 2016; 54: 1010-1011
15 Schulte-Mattler WJ, Georgiadis D, Zierz S. Discharge patterns of spontaneous activity and motor units on concentric needle electromyography. Muscle and Nerve 2001; 24: 123-126
16 Robbins GT, Tucker BG, Stashuk DW, Dillingham TR. Average proportional consecutive interval difference accurately differentiates spontaneous activity from motor unit potentials. Muscle Nerve 2019; 60: 566-570
17 Stålberg E, van Dijk H, Falck B, Kimura J, Neuwirth C, Pitt M, Podnar S, Rubin DI, Rutkove S, Sanders DB, Sonoo M, Tankisi H, Zwarts M. Standards for quantification of EMG and neurography. Clin Neurophysiol 2019; 130: 1688-1729
18 Stalberg E, Bischoff C, Falck B. Outliers, a way to detect abnormality in quantitative EMG. Muscle Nerve 1994; 17: 392-399
19 Schulte-Mattler WJ, Georgiadis D, Tietze K, Zierz S. Relation between maximum discharge rates on electromyography and motor unit number estimates. Muscle and Nerve 2000; 23: 231-238
20 Jürgens TP, Puchner C, Schulte-Mattler WJ. Discharge rates in electromyography distinguish early between peripheral and central paresis. Muscle Nerve 2012; 46: 591-593
21 Hatanaka Y, Oh SJ. Ten-second exercise is superior to 30-second exercise for post-exercise facilitation in diagnosing Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome. Muscle Nerve 2008; 37: 572-575
22 Thaisetthawatkul P, Logigian EL, Herrmann DN. Dispersion of the distal compound muscle action potential as a diagnostic criterion for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy. J Neurol Sci 2002; 205: 59-63
23 Feinberg DM, Preston DC, Shefner JM, Logigian EL. Amplitude-dependent slowing of conduction in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and polyneuropathy. Muscle Nerve 1999; 22: 937-940
24 Eder M, Schulte-Mattler W, Pöschl P. Neurographic course Of Wallerian degeneration after human peripheral nerve injury. Muscle & nerve 2017; 56: 247-252
25 Bischoff C, Dengler R, Glocker F, Schulte-Mattler W. Ultraschalldiagnostik peripherer Nerven – Stellungnahme der EMG-Kommission der DGKN. Klin Neurophysiol 2015; 46: 97