METHODS: ALS patients were prospectively recruited. Muscle fasciculation (≥2 over 30-seconds, examined in biceps brachii-brachialis (BB), brachioradialis, tibialis anterior and vastus medialis) and nerve cross-sectional area (CSA) (median, ulnar, tibial, fibular nerve) were evaluated through NMUS. Ultrasound parameters were correlated with clinical data, including revised ALS Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS-R) progression at one year. A predictive model was constructed to differentiate fast progressors (ALSFRS-R decline ≥ 1/month) from non-fast progressors.
RESULTS: 40 ALS patients were recruited. Three parameters emerged as strong predictors of fast progressors: (i) ALSFRS-R slope at time of NMUS (p = 0.041), (ii) BB fasciculation count (p = 0.027) and (iii) proximal to distal median nerve CSA ratio
METHODS: An initial search of the SCOPUS database using an appropriate set of keywords yielded 290 studies, and 59 potential studies were selected after all the records were screened using the eligibility criteria. This review on crosstalk revealed that signal contamination due to crosstalk remains a major challenge in the application of surface myography techniques. Various methods have been employed in previous studies to identify, quantify and reduce crosstalk in surface myographic signals.
RESULTS: Although correlation-based methods for crosstalk quantification are easy to use, there is a possibility that co-contraction could be interpreted as crosstalk. High-definition EMG has emerged as a new technique that has been successfully applied to reduce crosstalk.
CONCLUSIONS: The phenomenon of crosstalk needs to be investigated carefully because it depends on many factors related to muscle task and physiology. This review article not only provides a good summary of the literature on crosstalk in myographic signals but also discusses new directions related to techniques for crosstalk identification, quantification and reduction. The review also provides insights into muscle-related issues that impact crosstalk in myographic signals.
METHODS: 93 patients and 78 spousal/sibling controls underwent comprehensive assessment of diet, clinical status, muscle strength/performance, frailty, body composition (using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry), and serum levels of neurogastrointestinal hormones and inflammatory markers.
RESULTS: PD patients were older than controls (66.0 ± 8.5 vs. 62.4 ± 8.4years, P = 0.003). Mean body mass index (24.0 ± 0.4 vs. 25.6 ± 0.5kg/m2, Padjusted = 0.016), fat mass index (7.4 ± 0.3 vs. 9.0 ± 0.3kg/m2, Padjusted<0.001), and whole-body fat percentage (30.7 ± 0.8 vs. 35.7 ± 0.9%, Padjusted<0.001) were lower in patients, even after controlling for age and gender. There were no between-group differences in skeletal muscle mass index and whole-body bone mineral density. Body composition parameters did not correlate with disease duration or motor severity. Reduced whole-body fat percentage was associated with higher risk of motor response complications as well as higher levels of insulin-growth factor-1 and inflammatory markers. PD patients had a higher prevalence of sarcopenia (17.2% vs. 10.3%, Padjusted = 0.340) and frailty (69.4% vs. 24.2%, Padjusted = 0.010). Older age and worse PD motor severity were predictors of frailty in PD.
CONCLUSIONS: We found reduced body fat with relatively preserved skeletal muscle mass, and a high prevalence of frailty, in PD. Further studies are needed to understand the patho-mechanisms underlying these alterations.