Radial motor nerve conduction studies recorded from triceps brachii and extensor carpi radialis longus: Techniques and reference values
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/AIMS: Optimal timing of nerve transfer surgery in cervical spinal cord injury (SCI) depends upon the integrity of lower motor neurons (LMNs) in recipient nerves, which is best predicted by compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitude. There are no established techniques for obtaining the CMAP in two recipient muscles: triceps brachii and extensor carpi radialis longus (ECRL). This study aimed to develop recording techniques for radial motor studies to triceps and ECRL, and to determine reference values for CMAP amplitudes in healthy volunteers. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study of healthy adults aged 18 years and older. Motor nerve conduction studies were performed, stimulating the radial nerve in the axilla, over the axillary pulse at the pectoralis major insertion. Recording was from triceps (long head) and ECRL. CMAP amplitude, area, latency, and stimulus intensity were recorded. Reference values (RV) were calculated for CMAP amplitudes using a value 2 standard deviations below the mean. Cube root or logarithmic transformations were used to correct for non-normal distributions. RESULTS: Twenty-five healthy subjects participated. Triceps mean CMAP amplitude was 15.5 mV (SD 4.19), with an RV of 8.1 mV. ECRL mean CMAP amplitude was 11.5 mV (SD 3.54), with an RV of 6.2 mV. CMAP amplitude at ECRL was 75% (95% confidence interval 50%-100%) of that at triceps. DISCUSSION: We describe a technique for recording radial motor NCS from triceps and ECRL. Knowledge of normal CMAP amplitudes will help identify LMN injury in patients with cervical SCI being considered for nerve transfers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".