Wrist, Elbow – Digit II, III; Wrist – Digit II, III

Surface Recording Technique, Antidromic Study
  • Giuliano Gentili
  • Mario Di Napoli

Original Settings

Sensitivity was 10–20 μV/division, and the machine used was a TECA model B. Sweep speed, low frequency filter, high-frequency filter, duration of pulse, and rate of pulse were not specified.


This study was performed in the supine position, with the elbow and fingers slightly flexed.


Following the antidromic method [ 1], signals were recorded 14 cm distally from the wrist to digit II and digit III (Figs. 1 and 2). Each recording was made separately. The active electrode (A) was placed to the base of the digit, and the reference (R) was placed 4 cm proximally to the active electrode, slightly distal to the distal interphalangeal joint. Ground (G) electrode was usually placed over the midforearm, and on occasion, it was placed between the stimulating cathode and the active electrode to diminish a shock artifact, on the palm of the hand (the figure shows the ground electrode placed on the palm). The authors used moistened pipe cleaner for recording from...


  1. 1.
    Melvin JL, Harris DH, Johnson EW (1966) Sensory and motor conduction velocities in the ulnar and median nerves. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 47:511–519PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mavor H, Shiozawa R (1971) Antidromic digital and palmar nerve action potentials. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 30:210–221PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Melvin JL, Schuchmann JA, Lanese RR (1973) Diagnostic specificity of motor and sensory nerve conduction variables in the carpal tunnel syndrome. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 54:69–74PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bhala RP, Thoppil E (1981) Early detection of carpal tunnel syndrome by sensory nerve conduction. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 21:155–164PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Buschbacher RM (1999) Median 14-cm and 7-cm antidromic sensory studies to digits two and three. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 78:S53–S62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chang MH, Wei SJ, Chiang HL et al (2002) Comparison of motor conduction techniquesGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chang MH, Liu LH, Lee YC et al (2006) Comparison of sensitivity of transcarpal median motor conduction velocity and conventional conduction techniques in electrodiagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. Clin Neurophysiol 117:984–991PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bland JDP (2000) A neurophysiological grading scale for carpal tunnel syndrome. Muscle Nerve 23:1280–1283PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giuliano Gentili
    • 1
  • Mario Di Napoli
    • 1
  1. 1.Neurological ServiceS. Camillo de’ Lellis General HospitalRietiItaly

Personalised recommendations