Comparison of cortical potentials evoked by mechanical and electrical stimulation of the rectum

Patients with irritable bowel syndrome have heightened perception of gut sensation. The mechanisms responsible for this remain unknown, due to current poor knowledge of the central processing of gut sensation. Cortical evoked potentials (CEPs) have been recorded following both electrical rectal stim...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Neurogastroenterology and motility 2000-12, Vol.12 (6), p.547-554
Hauptverfasser: Hobday, D. I., Hobson, A., Furlong, P. L., Thompson, D. G., Aziz, Q.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 554
container_issue 6
container_start_page 547
container_title Neurogastroenterology and motility
container_volume 12
creator Hobday, D. I.
Hobson, A.
Furlong, P. L.
Thompson, D. G.
Aziz, Q.
description Patients with irritable bowel syndrome have heightened perception of gut sensation. The mechanisms responsible for this remain unknown, due to current poor knowledge of the central processing of gut sensation. Cortical evoked potentials (CEPs) have been recorded following both electrical rectal stimulation (ERS) and mechanical rectal stimulation (MRS). Because of the lack of a direct comparison of these two methods, their robustness for future clinical use remains unknown. The aim of our study was to compare the characteristics of CEPs following ERS and MRS. CEPs were recorded from the vertex in 14 healthy volunteers following ERS with bipolar ring electrodes, and MRS by repeated rectal distension. CEPs were recorded in all subjects following electrical stimulation, but only in 11 subjects following mechanical stimulation. In comparison with electrical stimulation, mechanical stimulation produced CEPs with a smaller amplitude and longer latency. However, the morphology of CEPs following electrical and mechanical rectal stimulation was similar, with no difference in the interpeak latencies. In conclusion, we have demonstrated that electrical rectal stimulation is a more reliable stimulus for recording CEPs. The similarity of the morphology and interpeak latencies of the CEPs suggests that both stimuli are activating a similar network of cortical neurones.
doi_str_mv 10.1046/j.1365-2982.2000.00231.x
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72483948</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>72483948</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3891-93799849a4419215e4c636af045da05f972e082b421b8b81849f380e0b53a8343</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkMtOwzAQRS0EolD4BeQVuwS_ktoSG1TxkgrdwNpy0omaksTBTqD9e5ymgi2L0Yx179yxDkKYkpgSkd5sYsrTJGJKspgRQmJCGKfx9gid_QrHw5yQiCqWTNC595tgTJlIT9GEUsr4jJIzpOe2bo0rvW2wLXBuXVfmpsKt7aDpSlN5DF_2A1Y42-Ea8rVp9rppVhgqyDu3f_qurPvKdOUY060BuyD29QU6KUIIXB76FL0_3L_Nn6LF8vF5freIci4VjRSfKSWFMkKE_9IERJ7y1BREJCtDkkLNGBDJMsFoJjNJg7XgkgDJEm4kF3yKrsfc1tnPHnyn69LnUFWmAdt7PWNCchVqiuRozJ313kGhW1fWxu00JXqAqzd6YKgHhnqAq_dw9TasXh1u9FkNq7_FA81guB0N32UFu38H69eXZRj4D4-wh48</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>72483948</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of cortical potentials evoked by mechanical and electrical stimulation of the rectum</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Journals</source><source>Wiley Free Content</source><creator>Hobday, D. I. ; Hobson, A. ; Furlong, P. L. ; Thompson, D. G. ; Aziz, Q.</creator><creatorcontrib>Hobday, D. I. ; Hobson, A. ; Furlong, P. L. ; Thompson, D. G. ; Aziz, Q.</creatorcontrib><description>Patients with irritable bowel syndrome have heightened perception of gut sensation. The mechanisms responsible for this remain unknown, due to current poor knowledge of the central processing of gut sensation. Cortical evoked potentials (CEPs) have been recorded following both electrical rectal stimulation (ERS) and mechanical rectal stimulation (MRS). Because of the lack of a direct comparison of these two methods, their robustness for future clinical use remains unknown. The aim of our study was to compare the characteristics of CEPs following ERS and MRS. CEPs were recorded from the vertex in 14 healthy volunteers following ERS with bipolar ring electrodes, and MRS by repeated rectal distension. CEPs were recorded in all subjects following electrical stimulation, but only in 11 subjects following mechanical stimulation. In comparison with electrical stimulation, mechanical stimulation produced CEPs with a smaller amplitude and longer latency. However, the morphology of CEPs following electrical and mechanical rectal stimulation was similar, with no difference in the interpeak latencies. In conclusion, we have demonstrated that electrical rectal stimulation is a more reliable stimulus for recording CEPs. The similarity of the morphology and interpeak latencies of the CEPs suggests that both stimuli are activating a similar network of cortical neurones.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1350-1925</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2982</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2982.2000.00231.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 11123710</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford UK: Blackwell Science Ltd</publisher><subject>Adult ; Catheterization ; cortical evoked potentials ; Electric Stimulation ; Evoked Potentials, Somatosensory - physiology ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Physical Stimulation ; Reaction Time - physiology ; rectum ; Rectum - innervation ; Rectum - physiology ; sensation ; Sensory Thresholds - physiology</subject><ispartof>Neurogastroenterology and motility, 2000-12, Vol.12 (6), p.547-554</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3891-93799849a4419215e4c636af045da05f972e082b421b8b81849f380e0b53a8343</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3891-93799849a4419215e4c636af045da05f972e082b421b8b81849f380e0b53a8343</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1046%2Fj.1365-2982.2000.00231.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1046%2Fj.1365-2982.2000.00231.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,1433,27924,27925,45574,45575,46409,46833</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11123710$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hobday, D. I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hobson, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Furlong, P. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thompson, D. G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aziz, Q.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of cortical potentials evoked by mechanical and electrical stimulation of the rectum</title><title>Neurogastroenterology and motility</title><addtitle>Neurogastroenterol Motil</addtitle><description>Patients with irritable bowel syndrome have heightened perception of gut sensation. The mechanisms responsible for this remain unknown, due to current poor knowledge of the central processing of gut sensation. Cortical evoked potentials (CEPs) have been recorded following both electrical rectal stimulation (ERS) and mechanical rectal stimulation (MRS). Because of the lack of a direct comparison of these two methods, their robustness for future clinical use remains unknown. The aim of our study was to compare the characteristics of CEPs following ERS and MRS. CEPs were recorded from the vertex in 14 healthy volunteers following ERS with bipolar ring electrodes, and MRS by repeated rectal distension. CEPs were recorded in all subjects following electrical stimulation, but only in 11 subjects following mechanical stimulation. In comparison with electrical stimulation, mechanical stimulation produced CEPs with a smaller amplitude and longer latency. However, the morphology of CEPs following electrical and mechanical rectal stimulation was similar, with no difference in the interpeak latencies. In conclusion, we have demonstrated that electrical rectal stimulation is a more reliable stimulus for recording CEPs. The similarity of the morphology and interpeak latencies of the CEPs suggests that both stimuli are activating a similar network of cortical neurones.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Catheterization</subject><subject>cortical evoked potentials</subject><subject>Electric Stimulation</subject><subject>Evoked Potentials, Somatosensory - physiology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Physical Stimulation</subject><subject>Reaction Time - physiology</subject><subject>rectum</subject><subject>Rectum - innervation</subject><subject>Rectum - physiology</subject><subject>sensation</subject><subject>Sensory Thresholds - physiology</subject><issn>1350-1925</issn><issn>1365-2982</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkMtOwzAQRS0EolD4BeQVuwS_ktoSG1TxkgrdwNpy0omaksTBTqD9e5ymgi2L0Yx179yxDkKYkpgSkd5sYsrTJGJKspgRQmJCGKfx9gid_QrHw5yQiCqWTNC595tgTJlIT9GEUsr4jJIzpOe2bo0rvW2wLXBuXVfmpsKt7aDpSlN5DF_2A1Y42-Ea8rVp9rppVhgqyDu3f_qurPvKdOUY060BuyD29QU6KUIIXB76FL0_3L_Nn6LF8vF5freIci4VjRSfKSWFMkKE_9IERJ7y1BREJCtDkkLNGBDJMsFoJjNJg7XgkgDJEm4kF3yKrsfc1tnPHnyn69LnUFWmAdt7PWNCchVqiuRozJ313kGhW1fWxu00JXqAqzd6YKgHhnqAq_dw9TasXh1u9FkNq7_FA81guB0N32UFu38H69eXZRj4D4-wh48</recordid><startdate>200012</startdate><enddate>200012</enddate><creator>Hobday, D. I.</creator><creator>Hobson, A.</creator><creator>Furlong, P. L.</creator><creator>Thompson, D. G.</creator><creator>Aziz, Q.</creator><general>Blackwell Science Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200012</creationdate><title>Comparison of cortical potentials evoked by mechanical and electrical stimulation of the rectum</title><author>Hobday, D. I. ; Hobson, A. ; Furlong, P. L. ; Thompson, D. G. ; Aziz, Q.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3891-93799849a4419215e4c636af045da05f972e082b421b8b81849f380e0b53a8343</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Catheterization</topic><topic>cortical evoked potentials</topic><topic>Electric Stimulation</topic><topic>Evoked Potentials, Somatosensory - physiology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Physical Stimulation</topic><topic>Reaction Time - physiology</topic><topic>rectum</topic><topic>Rectum - innervation</topic><topic>Rectum - physiology</topic><topic>sensation</topic><topic>Sensory Thresholds - physiology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hobday, D. I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hobson, A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Furlong, P. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thompson, D. G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aziz, Q.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Neurogastroenterology and motility</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hobday, D. I.</au><au>Hobson, A.</au><au>Furlong, P. L.</au><au>Thompson, D. G.</au><au>Aziz, Q.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of cortical potentials evoked by mechanical and electrical stimulation of the rectum</atitle><jtitle>Neurogastroenterology and motility</jtitle><addtitle>Neurogastroenterol Motil</addtitle><date>2000-12</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>547</spage><epage>554</epage><pages>547-554</pages><issn>1350-1925</issn><eissn>1365-2982</eissn><abstract>Patients with irritable bowel syndrome have heightened perception of gut sensation. The mechanisms responsible for this remain unknown, due to current poor knowledge of the central processing of gut sensation. Cortical evoked potentials (CEPs) have been recorded following both electrical rectal stimulation (ERS) and mechanical rectal stimulation (MRS). Because of the lack of a direct comparison of these two methods, their robustness for future clinical use remains unknown. The aim of our study was to compare the characteristics of CEPs following ERS and MRS. CEPs were recorded from the vertex in 14 healthy volunteers following ERS with bipolar ring electrodes, and MRS by repeated rectal distension. CEPs were recorded in all subjects following electrical stimulation, but only in 11 subjects following mechanical stimulation. In comparison with electrical stimulation, mechanical stimulation produced CEPs with a smaller amplitude and longer latency. However, the morphology of CEPs following electrical and mechanical rectal stimulation was similar, with no difference in the interpeak latencies. In conclusion, we have demonstrated that electrical rectal stimulation is a more reliable stimulus for recording CEPs. The similarity of the morphology and interpeak latencies of the CEPs suggests that both stimuli are activating a similar network of cortical neurones.</abstract><cop>Oxford UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Science Ltd</pub><pmid>11123710</pmid><doi>10.1046/j.1365-2982.2000.00231.x</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1350-1925
ispartof Neurogastroenterology and motility, 2000-12, Vol.12 (6), p.547-554
issn 1350-1925
1365-2982
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72483948
source MEDLINE; Wiley Journals; Wiley Free Content
subjects Adult
Catheterization
cortical evoked potentials
Electric Stimulation
Evoked Potentials, Somatosensory - physiology
Female
Humans
Male
Physical Stimulation
Reaction Time - physiology
rectum
Rectum - innervation
Rectum - physiology
sensation
Sensory Thresholds - physiology
title Comparison of cortical potentials evoked by mechanical and electrical stimulation of the rectum
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T08%3A50%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20cortical%20potentials%20evoked%20by%20mechanical%20and%20electrical%20stimulation%20of%20the%20rectum&rft.jtitle=Neurogastroenterology%20and%20motility&rft.au=Hobday,%20D.%20I.&rft.date=2000-12&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=547&rft.epage=554&rft.pages=547-554&rft.issn=1350-1925&rft.eissn=1365-2982&rft_id=info:doi/10.1046/j.1365-2982.2000.00231.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E72483948%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=72483948&rft_id=info:pmid/11123710&rfr_iscdi=true