Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The utility of F wave chronodispersion in lumbosacral radiculopathy

  • Original Communications
  • Published:
Journal of Neurology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The sensitivity of F wave chronodispersion (Fc) in evaluating nerve root pathology is unknown. We compared Fc in 91 patients with clinical and EMG evidence of L5 or S1 radiculopathy with Fc in 81 controls in order to evaluate its sensitivity in lumbosacral radiculopathy. F waves were obtained by stimulating the peroneal and tibial nerves behind the knee and recording from the extensor digitorum brevis (L5 predominant) and flexor hallucis brevis (S1 predominant) muscles, respectively. Fc was calculated by subtracting the shortest F wave latency from the longest and, in controls, ranged from 0.2 to 23.4 ms in the peroneal nerve, and from 1.2 to 13.4 ms in the tibial nerve (95th percentile = 13 ms for the peroneal nerve and 9.2 ms for the tibial nerve). In the patient group, Fc also ranged from 0.2 to 23.4 ms in the peroneal nerve, and from 0.4 to 18.2 ms in the tibial nerve. Only 5 (5.5%) and 8 (11.3%) patients for the peroneal and tibial nerves, respectively, had Fc values which fell beyond the 95th percentile, a percentage far below the sensitivity of F wave latency measurement and not substantially different from chance. Thus we conclude that Fc has no substantial additional value in evaluating lumbosacral radiculopathy over that of F wave latency.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. AAEE Glossary of Terms in Clinical Electromyography. Nomenclature Committee (1987) Muscle Nerve 10 [Suppl 8]:G10-G11

    Google Scholar 

  2. Aguayo A, Nair CPV, Midgley R (1971) Experimental progressive compression neuropathy in the rabbit. Arch Neurol 24:358–364

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Aminoff MJ, Goodin DS, Parry GJ, Barbaro NM, Weinstein RP, Rosenblum ML (1985) Electrophysiologic evaluation of lumbosacral radiculopathies: electromyography, late responses, and somatosensory evoked potentials. Neurology 35:1514–1518

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Eisen AA (1987) Radiculopathies and plexopathies. In: Brown WIT, Bolton CF (eds) Clinical electromyography. Butterworths, Boston, pp 51–73

    Google Scholar 

  5. Eisen A, Hoirch M, Moll A (1983) Evaluation of radiculopathies by segmental stimulation and somatosensory evoked potentials. Can J Neurol Sci 10:178–182

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Fierro B, Raimondo D, Modica A (1990) F-response assessment in healthy control subjects. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 30:501–508

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Fisher MA (1982) F response latency determination. Muscle Nerve 5:730–734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Fisher MA, Shivde AJ, Teixera C, Grainer S (1978) Clinical and electrophysiological appraisal of the significance of radicular injury in back pain. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 41:303–306

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Kalyon TA, Bilgic F, Ertem O (1983) The diagnostic value of late responses in radiculopathies due to disc herniation. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 23:183–186

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kimura J (1978) A comment. Muscle Nerve 1:250–252

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kimura J (1989) Electrodiagnosis in diseases of nerve and muscle: principles and practice, 2nd edn. Davis, Philadelphia, pp 103–138, 227–274, 332–355

    Google Scholar 

  12. Mara TR (1987) F wave measurements: a comparison of various recording techniques in health and peripheral nerve disease. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 27:33–37

    Google Scholar 

  13. Panayiotopoulos CP (1979) F chronodispersion: a new electrophysiologic method. Muscle Nerve 2:68–72

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Tang LM, Schwartz MS, Swash M (1988) Postural effects on F wave parameters in lumbosacral root compression and canal stenosis. Brain 111:207–213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tonzola RF, Ackil AA, Shahani BT, Young RR (1981) Usefulness of electrophysiological studies in the diagnosis of lumbosacral root disease. Ann Neurol 9:305–308

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Wilbourn AJ, Aminoff MJ (1988) AAEE Minimonograph no. 32. The electrophysiologic examination in patients with radiculopathies. Muscle Nerve 11:1099–1114

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Yates SK, Brown WF (1974) Characteristics of the F response: a single motor unit study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 42:161–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Young RR, Shahani BT (1978) Clinical value and limitations of F-wave determination. Muscle Nerve 1:248–250

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurology, Division of Clinical Neurophysiology (EMG), Hospital for Special Surgery and The New York Hospital-Cornell Medical Center, NewYork, New York, USA

    Samson Mebrahtu & Michael Rubin

Authors
  1. Samson Mebrahtu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Rubin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mebrahtu, S., Rubin, M. The utility of F wave chronodispersion in lumbosacral radiculopathy. J Neurol 240, 427–429 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00867356

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00867356

Key words

Search

Navigation