-transparent.png){kind=logo}
The utility of the magnetic coil for stimulation of the cervical spinal nerves was compared to electrical stimulation by a monopolar needle cathode placed onto the spinal lamina in six volunteers. No statistical difference in average amplitudes or areas of evoked CMAPs was found although the size of the magnetic coil evoked potentials was less at C7-8 in several subjects. Electrical stimulation resulted in depolarization at a more proximal site. Electrical stimulation was associated with more discomfort, especially at C5-6. We conclude that electrical stimulation using a monopolar needle as the cathode is the superior technique for the clinical electrophysiologic study of the proximal brachial plexus and cervical spinal nerves.
B A Evans, and
J R Daube, and
W J Litchy
January 1995,
Electromyography and clinical neurophysiology,
B A Evans, and
J R Daube, and
W J Litchy
October 1990,
Muscle & nerve,
B A Evans, and
J R Daube, and
W J Litchy
January 1997,
Electromyography and clinical neurophysiology,
B A Evans, and
J R Daube, and
W J Litchy
October 1994,
The European respiratory journal,
B A Evans, and
J R Daube, and
W J Litchy
January 1986,
Applied neurophysiology,
B A Evans, and
J R Daube, and
W J Litchy
October 1991,
Current opinion in neurology and neurosurgery,
B A Evans, and
J R Daube, and
W J Litchy
October 1995,
Lancet (London, England),
B A Evans, and
J R Daube, and
W J Litchy
January 2014,
Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference,
B A Evans, and
J R Daube, and
W J Litchy
November 1985,
Pain,
B A Evans, and
J R Daube, and
W J Litchy
October 1993,
Spine,
