Pneumatic evoked potential. Sensory or auditive potential?

Neurophysiol Clin. 2013 Jun;43(3):189-95. doi: 10.1016/j.neucli.2013.05.002. Epub 2013 May 29.

Abstract

Study aim: In this study, evoked potentials (EPs) to a pneumatic, innocuous, and calibrated stimulation of the skin were recorded in 22 volunteers.

Methods: Air-puff stimuli were delivered through a home-made device (INSA de Lyon, Laboratoire Ampère, CHU de Saint-Étienne, France) synchronized with an EEG recording (Micromed(®)).

Results: A reproducible EP was recorded in 18 out of 22 subjects (82% of cases) with a mean latency of about 120-130ms, and maximal amplitude at Cz. This EP actually consisted of two components, an auditory and a somatosensory one. Indeed, it was significantly decreased in amplitude, but did not disappear, when the noise generated by the air-puff was masked. We also verified that a stimulation close to the skin but not perceived by the subject was not associated with any EP. Conduction velocity between hand and shoulder was calculated around 25m/s.

Conclusions: This preliminary study demonstrates that pneumatic EPs can be recorded in normal volunteers.

Keywords: Intégration multimodale; Methodology; Multimodal integration; Méthodologie; Pneumatic evoked potentials; Potentiels évoqués pneumatiques; Somatosensory system; Somesthésie.

MeSH terms

  • Adolescent
  • Adult
  • Air
  • Analysis of Variance
  • Data Interpretation, Statistical
  • Electroencephalography
  • Evoked Potentials, Auditory / physiology*
  • Evoked Potentials, Somatosensory / physiology*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Physical Stimulation*
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Sensation / physiology*
  • Skin / innervation
  • Skin Physiological Phenomena
  • Young Adult