UNDERSTANDING MEDICAL NEURODIAGNOSTIC DEVICES -PART 1;
THE HISTORY OF THE NEUROSCIENCES, THE NEUROLOGIST AND THE UTILITY OF THE
H-REFLEX AND F-RESPONSE.
Neurodiagnostic
specificity will facilitate expediency in many diagnostic perplexities.
The procedures aid in the diagnoses of central and peripheral
neuropathies. Further symptoms and manifestations, of epilepsy,
stroke, diabetic radiculopathy, and chronic pain syndromes where state of
the art imaging has failed to provide answers,
Neurodiagnostic modalities can discover those
elusive answers when the physician understands the science of findings
discovery. Even
specificity on the precise nuclei within the brain and spinal column which
may be diseased or dysfunctional can be located.
And finally utility for the purposes of
biofeedback and the rehabilitation of previously non-mobile or
non-ambulatory patients through reintegration bio-feedback reeducation
can be achieved. The purpose of this review is to familiarize the
graduate medical physician with post graduate neuroscience taxonomy and
practical understanding of it's application.
THE
MODALITIES
It is essential to understand a few
basic concepts and in doing so this examiner will take you from the
beginning of the neuroscience up to 21’s Century cutting edge
technology. The first concept is latency. Think of a stimulus S,
a period of time L, and a response R. The period of time
between the stimulus and the response is the latency.
During an examination when one elect’s a
deep tendon reflex, the time between your stimulus of the stretch and
vibratory receptors and the elicited response is the latency. Thus when
you elicit a deep tendon reflex, you have reproduced a “late latency
response.”
In 1918, Dr. Hoffman conceived that if
he could electrically reproduce a deep tendon-like reflex, he could
develop tremendous insight into the afferent sensory receptors, the
afferent sensory nerve into the posterior horn of the associated spinal
level of the central nervous system, the integrity of the internuncial
neurons connecting the posterior horn and the anterior horn, the
integrity of the anterior horn motor cells and the lower motor neuron
integrity, as well as associated somatic structures. Dr. Hoffman then
presented a submaximal stimulus delivered to the tibial nerve in the
poplitial fossa and evoked a late response in the soleus muscle, with a
latency similar to that of the ankle jerk. Dr. Hoffman correctly
concluded that on the basis of his observations, both of these responses
represent activity of the same stretch reflex arc. Thus, Dr. Hoffman
was able to test the functional integrity of the ankle jerk reflex arc
and its associated neurosomatic counterparts.
1
Because of the excitement Dr. Hoffman’s
discovery made, Magladery and McDougal reproduced Dr. Hoffman’s test,
and elicited a later latency response similar to the ankle jerk. They
named the test the “H-reflex” after Dr. Hoffman’s conclusions. This is
the only response test that will have the word “reflex” in the name to
honor Dr. Hoffman’s complicated conclusions, correlation’s and
electrically induced neurosomatic ankle response simulating the
neurophysiological ankle-jerk deep tendon reflex. However, these
researchers discovered that even though the large amplitude H-reflex in
the soleus easily can be evoked by submaximal stimulation of the tibial
nerve, no such response can normally be evoked by stimulation of other
skeletal muscles. These neuroscientists believed that if they could
stimulate other spinal levels of the cord they could then test the
integrity of other deep tendon reflexes. They went on to demonstrate
that a late response evoked by stronger stimulation and with different
physiological features, but with similar latency to the H-reflex, was
recordable from the muscles of the hands and feet and subsequently named
this test the “F-response”.2
Originally the response was thought to be due to a polysynaptic
reflex. However, it is now generally believed that centrifugal
discharge from individual motoneurons arise from antidromic volleys in
their axons. Thus the F-response may be generated by stimulation of
skeletal muscles in the hands and feet, and assists in testing the
integrity of the other deep tendon reflex pathways, as well as
peripheral nerves such as the median nerve or ulnar nerve. The test is
indicated to check for peripheral neuropathies and root irritations, as
well as thoracic outlet syndromes. When considering thoracic outlet
syndromes, it would be prudent to use hyperabduction tests as well as
other orthopedic tests; however, never rely solely on the orthopedic
tests as positive proof of thoracic outlet syndrome. For example,
if a female patient suffers from signs and symptoms that would normally
be associated with a thoracic outlet syndrome, you may ask her, “When
you place objects on an overhead cupboard or upon a shelf, do you feel a
pain in your arms and neck that diminishes as you return your arms to
the neutral position?” or “when you have to reach up to place objects on
the shelf above the closet, or in over head bins on airplanes do you
feel these symptoms?” This will form an excellent history for ordering
an F-response. If the F-response report of findings indicates a
neurovascular compression syndrome, then you have validating evidence to
support your physical, orthopedic and neurological examination findings,
ranging from a possible decrease in the radial pulse in the position
that elicits the symptoms or a bruit in the supraclavicular area as well
as a cervical rib or osseous abnormality of the clavicle or first rib as
observed during your radiological examination. Obviously, often the
patient may not present with the classic signs and symptoms of thoracic
outlet syndrome and your Neurodiagnostic test findings will be of great
assistance in these circumstances.3
There
are some important “key” differences both electrically and
physiologically between the H-reflex and the F-response. The most
important differences follow:1,2,3
1.
The H-reflex
is primarily a monosynaptic reflex evoked by a direct electrical
stimulation of large primary muscle afferent (1a) fibers in the mixed
tibial nerve.
However, it
differs from the tendon jerk, in which
stretching or vibration of muscle spindles results in
activation of group 1a afferent fibers, as opposed
to the H-reflex where
the afferent sensory
receptors are electrical bypasses.
2.
The
F-response is not a reflex. The afferent and efferent arcs of this
response consist of the same alpha motor axon.
3.
F-responses
appear following a stronger stimulus than that which would be required for an H-reflex.
4.
Fluctuations
in the latency of a single motor unit (SMU) activated in an F-response
are less than in an H-reflex.
5.
Contrasting
with the H-reflex, which is routinely only recorded in
soleus-gastrocnemius muscles in adults,
F-responses can be recorded from almost every skeletal muscle in the
adult.
Primarily the
H-reflex and the F-response studies are used
to evaluate function in the peripheral nervous system,. It has been
suggested that these two tests be reserved for evaluation of condition
only in large diameter nerve fibers. The H-reflex in the adult is
generally recorded only from a few muscles in the resting state;
although usually only the soleus. However, evaluation of the
F-responses perhaps will represent a more versatile method of studying
motor nerve conduction because they can be recorded from most skeletal
muscles. Moreover, F-responses are evoked whenever tests for motor
conduction velocity are performed.2,3
H-reflexes and F-response abnormalities have been noted
in-patients with neuropathies of the primary “axonal” type, as well as
of the segmental demyelinating type. Whenever there are disorders that
specifically affect large sensory fibbers, such as pansensory neuropathy
or Friedreich’s ataxia, H-reflexes and tendon jerks are absent but
F-response latencies remain normal. For example, a patient’s history
reveals that the patient had slipped down some stairs while at work,
indicating a worker’s compensation injury. During your neurological
examination, you note bilaterally silent ankle jerks. First you could
request an H-reflex study. If the H-reflex study comes back as
bilaterally silent or diminished, then you would request that an
F-response study be performed. If the F-response come back as a normal
late response, then you would know that this patient has some pansensory
neuropathy such as a uremic neuropathy, an alcoholic neuropathy, a
diabetic neuropathy (which is a metabolic neuropathy) or perhaps a
Friedreich’s ataxia. Further, if you were performing the tests, you
would be strapped into waiting and would have performed them as
addressed above. In any event, perhaps this patient’s leg gave out due
to their underlying pansensory neuropathy, which in turn caused the
patient to fall down the steps, which may preclude this person from
coverage under the worker’s compensation amalgam or cause apportionment
to be a factor dependent upon additional situational criteria.
Patients with neuropathies in which the
primary pathology appears to be segmental demyelination such as
Guillain-Barr’e syndrome, prolongation of late response latencies may be
the first quantifiable objective sign.2,3
Unlike
conventional nerve conduction studies, which do not correlate will with
clinical findings, presence or absence of conduction block documented by
a later response study does correlate well with the patient’s clinical
status, such as weakness in appropriate limbs.1,2,3
F-response studies or late response studies have been
demonstrated not only in the evaluation of patients with peripheral
neuropathies but also in the assessment of those with entrapment
neuropathies and root compression syndromes.
Carpal
Tunnel syndrome and Ulnar Entrapment Neuropathy as well as Thoracic
Outlet Syndrome have demonstrated the appropriate abnormalities of late
responses.1,2,3
Earlier we
discussed using the F-response against the H-reflex to locate pansensory
neuropathies. The exception to this is in patients with peripheral
neuropathies affecting small diameter fibers such as an amyloid
neuropathy, where the ankle jerk may be absent because of the
involvement of the fusimotor fibers, whereas H-reflexes will be
preserved because they bypass muscle spindles.
Most
neuroscientists emphasize that patients with root compression syndromes
are candidates for H-reflexes and F-responses, as these tests are
extremely useful in localizing the lesions in the patients’ lumbosacral
and cervical roots.
Graphically, the H-reflex excitability curves following
double stimulation of the tibial nerve in the poplitial fossa have been
examined in various neurological disorders. These curves are often
altered in-patients with CNS lesions, producing spasticity, rigidity or
both. Finally, F-response studies can also provide a measure of the
central excitatory state of spinal motoneurons.
1
Patients with
acute CNS lesions, F-responses occur with decreased persistence or
amplitude on the clinically involved side. These F-response
abnormalities correlate clinically with the severity of the weakness,
decreased tone and decreased deep tendon reflexes. In-patients with
chronic spasticity, amplitude and persistence of F-responses are
increased.
Of course there are many more substantiated and experimental
uses for the F-responses and the H-reflexes, however the intent of this
article is to familiarize Agents, Investigators, Psychologists, and
Medical Examiners who are not neuroscientists on when an H-reflex study
or F-response study was medically necessary or should be requested for
an expedient diagnosis.
In Part Two this examiner will present Needle-electromyography,
Nerve Conduction Velocity studies or “SNAP’ studies.
By Scott D. Neff, DC DABCO CFE
DABFE FFABS FFAAJTS