How do different recording techniques affect the quality of somatosensory information obtained from limbs?
Best insight from top research papers
The quality of somatosensory information obtained from limbs through various recording techniques is influenced by several factors, including electrode configuration, stimulation methods, and the processing of recorded signals. Multi-contact nerve cuffs, for instance, have shown significant improvements in capturing both temporal and spatial information from peripheral nerves, with high-density configurations yielding better classification accuracy and F1-scores compared to low-density setups. This suggests that the number of contacts and their spatial arrangement play crucial roles in the effectiveness of extraneural recording techniques, such as LDA and spatiotemporal signatures, in capturing detailed somatosensory information . The material composition of electrodes, as investigated through the use of subdermal needle electrodes made from stainless steel and platinum/iridium alloy, does not significantly affect the waveform parameters of cortical somatosensory-evoked potentials (SEP), indicating that waveform quality can be maintained across different electrode materials under clinical conditions . Additionally, the ability to distinguish between different types of sensory stimuli, such as nociception, proprioception, and touch, through electroneurographic (ENG) signals suggests that the recording technique and subsequent signal processing are pivotal in extracting meaningful sensory information . Technique variations, including stimulation and recording modes, significantly impact the waveform characteristics of evoked sensory potentials, highlighting the necessity for standardized methodologies to ensure consistent and reliable data collection . Furthermore, the recording conditions for giant somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) differ from those of short-latency SEPs, affecting the amplitude and potentially the detection of cortical hyperexcitability in neurological disorders . The comprehensive study of cerebral evoked potentials, particularly SEPs, underscores the importance of appropriate recording methodologies and electrode montages in diagnosing neurological conditions . Multielectrode techniques facilitate the understanding of neural ensemble dynamics and the somatosensory system's response to stimuli, emphasizing the need for multisite recordings to capture the complexity of somatosensory information . Knowledge about muscle spindle behavior further informs the design of somatosensory neuroprostheses, indicating the relevance of proprioceptive information in enhancing neuroprosthetic performance . Lastly, the monitoring of somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP) during spinal surgery illustrates the technique's utility in assessing spinal cord functional integrity, albeit with considerations for anesthesia and physiological factors that may influence recording quality .
Answers from top 8 papers
More filters
| Papers (8) | Insight |
|---|---|
01 Jan 1989 2 Citations | Different electrode montages in somatosensory evoked potential (SEP) recordings can reveal neural generators along the pathway, aiding in diagnosing neurological conditions and enhancing the quality of limb somatosensory information. |
| Multielectrode recordings enhance somatosensory information quality by revealing dynamic neural ensemble interactions, bilateral S1 hemispheric crosstalk, and rapid adjustments in functional connectivity during behavioral contexts. | |
| Different recording techniques significantly impact somatosensory information quality by affecting latency, amplitude, and duration of evoked sensory potentials, emphasizing the need for standardized methodology in nerve conduction studies. | |
| Different needle recording electrodes showed no significant differences in somatosensory-evoked potential (SEP) waveforms, indicating minimal impact on the quality of limb somatosensory information obtained. | |
11 Jul 2022 | Different recording techniques like LDA and spatiotemporal signatures show varying improvements in classification accuracy, with spatiotemporal signatures demonstrating a higher increase in performance compared to LDA. |
| Different recording techniques, such as giant SEP vs. SSEP conditions, impact somatosensory information quality; SSEP condition yields 80% amplitude compared to giant SEP, aiding in detecting cortical hyperexcitability. | |
01 Jul 2022 | Different recording techniques like LDA and spatiotemporal signatures show varying improvements in classification accuracy, with spatiotemporal signatures demonstrating a higher increase in performance compared to LDA. |
01 May 2017 | Multi-channel cuff electrodes can successfully classify nociceptive and proprioceptive stimuli with less than 10% error, but further work is needed to reliably extract touch information from limb recordings. |
Related Questions
What are the most effective methods for recording somatosensory information from limbs?6 answersThe most effective methods for recording somatosensory information from limbs involve a variety of advanced neural interfaces and technologies designed to capture the complex nature of sensory feedback. Ultra-small multi-electrode arrays (UMEA) with amorphous silicon carbide (a-SiC) have shown promise in high precision intraneural detection of cutaneous sensory signals, capable of discriminating between different types of mechanoceptors associated with touch sensations. Similarly, the dual Regenerative Multielectrode Interface (REMI) has been utilized to characterize neurophysiological activity from motor and sensory nerves, offering insights into the distinct shapes of action potentials.
Innovative approaches like the spiked ultraflexible neural (SUN) interface, which integrates spiked structures for intrafascicular nerve recording, have demonstrated the ability to differentiate tactile from proprioceptive stimuli, highlighting the potential for high spatial resolution classification of sensory information. Additionally, the development of polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) microchannel electrodes has been noted for their highly sensitive recordings in vivo, providing a promising building block for three-dimensional regenerative implants.
High-count penetrating microelectrode arrays, such as the Utah Slanted Electrode Arrays (USEAs), have been explored for their capacity to record unit activity from peripheral nerves over extended periods, supporting the potential for restoring motor control and sensory feedback after limb loss or spinal cord injury. Moreover, electrical stimulation techniques, including those targeting the dorsal root ganglia (DRG) or primary somatosensory cortex (S1), have been investigated for their ability to evoke activity that mirrors natural limb movement, offering insights into neural coding and the representation of limb state.
These methods, ranging from ultra-small electrode arrays to sophisticated stimulation techniques, represent the forefront of efforts to accurately record somatosensory information from limbs, each contributing unique insights and capabilities towards the development of advanced somatosensory neuroprostheses.
What are the most effective location for recording somatosensory information from limbs?9 answersThe most effective locations for recording somatosensory information from limbs involve strategic placement of electrodes and interfaces to capture neural signals with high fidelity. Ultra-small multi-electrode arrays (UMEA) with small outer diameters and surface areas have been implemented for high precision intraneural detection of cutaneous sensory signals, demonstrating the capability to record specific sensory modalities from peripheral nerves. Additionally, the use of ultrasonography (USG) to establish optimal recording positions for antidromic conduction of the superficial peroneal nerve highlights the importance of precise electrode placement for enhanced signal amplitude.
Short latency somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) further emphasize the need for a basic understanding of nerve pathways and appropriate electrode placement along the peripheral and central sensory pathway following nerve stimulation. The development of artificial sensors and interfaces, such as the spiked ultraflexible neural (SUN) interface, implanted into the peripheral nervous system, suggests that capturing sensory information directly from transmitting axons within primary sensory nerves can be effective. Peripheral neural interfaces (PNI) have shown effectiveness in connecting the nervous system to artificial limbs, enabling both the recording of motor intentions and stimulation of sensory fibers.
Research into electrical stimulation of dorsal root ganglia (DRG) or primary somatosensory cortex (S1) for somatosensory feedback in prosthetic control indicates that both central and peripheral approaches have their merits. High-count penetrating microelectrode arrays implanted in peripheral nerves, such as the Utah Slanted Electrode Arrays (USEAs), have shown promise in maintaining viable recordings and reducing contamination from myoelectric activity. The dorsal root ganglia (DRG) have been identified as a potential substrate for somatosensory neural interfaces (SSNI), offering a compact structure isolated from movements and large muscles. Steady state somatosensory evoked potential (SSSEP) studies have identified optimal stimulation frequency combinations for effective signal extraction from lower limbs. Lastly, intraoperative sensory cortical mapping has been recognized as a reliable method for functional localization of the central sulcus during neurosurgical procedures, aiding in the identification of somatosensory cortex.
In summary, effective locations for recording somatosensory information from limbs involve the use of advanced electrode arrays and interfaces, precise placement guided by ultrasonography and understanding of nerve pathways, and potentially targeting specific neural structures such as the DRG or central sensory pathways for optimal signal capture and feedback in prosthetic control.
How does limb somatosensory loss impact the quality of life of multiple sclerosis patients?5 answersLimb somatosensory loss in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients can significantly impact their quality of life (QoL). Studies suggest that sensorimotor impairments, such as weakness and discoordination in the lower limbs, can lead to limitations in everyday activities, reduced walking and balance function, and ultimately decreased QoL. Additionally, factors like disease course, severity, and relapses of MS have been found to be associated with both physical and mental health composite scores, indicating a direct influence on the QoL of MS patients. Understanding the multifaceted nature of QoL in MS, which includes physical disability, cultural, socio-economic factors, coping mechanisms, and psychological well-being, is crucial for healthcare providers to effectively improve the overall QoL of MS patients.
What is the prevalence or incidence of individuals suffering from limb somatosensory loss following traumatic brain injury?5 answersThe prevalence of limb somatosensory loss following traumatic brain injury (TBI) varies depending on the study population. In chronic stroke survivors, lower limb somatosensory impairments were found in the majority of individuals, with deficits in exteroceptive sensation, sharp-blunt discrimination, and proprioception, particularly in distal regions of the foot and toes. Individuals with a concussion also exhibited altered somatosensory function, showing diminished plantar touch sensation and inhibited plantar pressure pain sensation compared to controls. Moreover, in military personnel exposed to blast injuries, sensory impairments such as auditory and visual disturbances were common, with rates of dual sensory impairment documented in a significant proportion of veterans. These findings highlight the diverse somatosensory challenges individuals may face following TBI.
What is the percentage and type of traumatic brain injury causing limb somatosensory deficits?5 answersTraumatic brain injury (TBI) can lead to limb somatosensory deficits, with varying percentages and types of injuries causing these issues. Studies have shown that TBI can result in persistent sensorimotor deficitsand long-term altered sensory processing. Specifically, TBI-induced neurodegeneration correlates with sensorimotor impairments associated with TBI. Additionally, TBI can induce long-term changes in neuronal responses across the entire columnar network in the primary sensory cortex, leading to sensorimotor behavior deficits. These deficits can include hyper-excitation in supragranular layers of the cortex, affecting intra-areal processing and long-range integration, particularly in response to complex, naturalistic sensory information. Therefore, the percentage and type of TBI causing limb somatosensory deficits can vary based on the severity and nature of the injury, impacting sensory processing and motor function.
What are the main sensory methodologies?4 answersThe main sensory methodologies discussed in the abstracts include ranking, flash profiling, ranking descriptive analysis, free sorting, projective mapping, napping, polarized sensory positioning, the optimized sensory profile method, polarized projective mapping, ranked-scaling, check-all-that-apply, temporal dominance of sensations, the ideal profile method, just-about-right scales, classical discrimination tests, time-intensity method, quantitative flavour profiling, descriptive analysis methodologies, panel test methodology, and sensory assessment method. These methodologies are used for various purposes such as product development, quality assurance, and control. They involve techniques like standardized flavor languages, experimental design, multivariate analysis, and response surface methodology. The selection and training of sensory subjects, as well as the use of panel leaders, are important aspects of these methodologies. The aim is to obtain reliable and comparable results across cultural boundaries, decrease variabilities in judgment, and monitor the sensory properties of a product precisely. The use of fast sensory methods is also mentioned, which allow for capturing sensory properties outside the laboratory environment.