Premium
22
Comparison of multichannel electrogastrograms obtained with the use of three different electrode types
Author(s) -
JONDERKO K,
OBROK I,
KRUSIECSWIDERGOL B,
KASICKAJONDERKO A,
BLONSKAFAJFROWSKA B
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
neurogastroenterology and motility
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.489
H-Index - 105
eISSN - 1365-2982
pISSN - 1350-1925
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2982.2006.00789_22.x
Subject(s) - electrode , electrogastrogram , biomedical engineering , materials science , stimulation , electrical conductor , chemistry , medicine , stomach , composite material
Background/Aims: Multichannel recording of the gastric myoelectrical activity (GMA) is a promising evolution of electrogastrography. In the study we searched for electrodes the most suitable to obtain high quality multi‐channel electrogastrograms. Methods: Twelve young volunteers (9 F, 3 M, aged 24.3 ± 0.6 years) underwent on separate days three four‐channel electrogastrographic recordings of the GMA: 30 min fasted and 90 min after a solid meal stimulation. The electrogastrograms were recorded in randomized order with 3M Red Dot class Ag/AgCl electrodes designed primarily for long‐term electrocardiographic monitoring: type2222 (conductive area, CA/total area, TA): 2.00/10.24 cm 2 , type2271 2.54/29.64 cm 2 , type2660 11.64/11.64 cm 2 (total surface conductive!) and subsequently analysed with Polygram Net™ EGG 311224 software (Medtronic, USA). Electrical resistance between active electrodes relative to the reference one was measured with a digital ohmmeter before and after the recording session. Results: Type2660 yielded consistently higher electrical resistance than the other electrode types, moreover in the case of type2271 and type2660 electrical conductivity significantly improved at the end of the recording relative to the basal measurement. Analysis of variance involving the relative time‐share of normogastria, meal‐induced change in dominant power, as well as a set of parameters unique for the multichannel electrogastrography and intended to characterize the so‐called spatial displacement of the gastric slow waves did not reveal any statistically significant effect of the electrode type on the parameters of the multichannel electrogastrogram. Although, when particular numerical data were inspected, type2271 was found to perform slightly worse than the other electrode types. Type2271 was also rated the less handy among the electrodes tested. Conclusion: Multichannel surface electrogastrography seems to be technically feasible with any type of high quality Ag/AgCl electrodes available on the market, whereas small dimensions enabling easy placement on the abdomen may be a feature favouring the choice of a particular electrode type for this examination.