2016Clinical Neurophysiology PracticeOpen access

Antidromic vs orthodromic sensory median nerve conduction studies

Josep Valls‐Solé, João Leote, Pedro Pereira

Open full text 19 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Median sensory nerve conduction studies are arguably the most often performed electrodiagnostic tests worldwide. Routine tests in clinical practice are done using either antidromic or orthodromic techniques type of stimulation, with no universal agreement on the use of one or the other technique. METHODS: We review the advantages and drawbacks of antidromic and orthodromic as well as their particularities for clinical application and research. RESULTS: The two techniques differ on how physical and physiological changes affect the action potential. Near-nerve recording is better suited for the orthodromic than for the antidromic technique, while studies of nerve excitability are better suited for the antidromic than for the orthodromic technique. CONCLUSION: Both techniques are equally suitable for routine tests but research studies may specifically demand one or the other.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECTIVE: Median sensory nerve conduction studies are arguably the most often performed electrodiagnostic tests worldwide. Routine tests in clinical practice are done using either antidromic or orthodromic techniques type of stimulation, with no universal agreement on the use of one or the other technique. METHODS: We review the advantages and drawbacks of antidromic and orthodromic as well as their particularities for clinical application and research. RESULTS: The two techniques differ on how physical and physiological changes affect the action potential. Near-nerve recording is better suited for the orthodromic than for the antidromic technique, while studies of nerve excitability are better suited for the antidromic than for the orthodromic technique. CONCLUSION: Both techniques are equally suitable for routine tests but research studies may specifically demand one or the other.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 19 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECTIVE: Median sensory nerve conduction studies are arguably the most often performed electrodiagnostic tests worldwide. Routine tests in clinical practice are done using either antidromic or orthodromic techniques type of stimulation, with no universal agreement on the use of one or the other technique. METHODS: We review the advantages and drawbacks of antidromic and orthodromic as well as their particularities for clinical application and research. RESULTS: The two techniques differ on how physical and physiological changes affect the action potential. Near-nerve recording is better suited for the orthodromic than for the antidromic technique, while studies of nerve excitability are better suited for the antidromic than for the orthodromic technique. CONCLUSION: Both techniques are equally suitable for routine tests but research studies may specifically demand one or the other.

Key concepts: Orthodromic, Antidromic, Medicine, Sensory nerve, Sensory system, Stimulation, Neuroscience, Internal medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Antidromic vs orthodromic sensory median nerve conduction studies — Research Paper | ScholarLens