论文部分内容阅读
兴奋性是活组织的最基本特性之一,反映兴奋性的指标一直比较混乱。Lapicque提出的时值(τ)曾流行一时,至今还有一定的影响,但在实际上多用i·t·c而不专靠τ。后来,作者之一侯提出了Ti、a和It。最近,侯作了进一步分析,主张用标准电量(a)来作为兴奋性指标。我们用单个方波电刺激测痛法,测定了20例临床病人的τ、i·t·c和a。从对测试结果的分析比较中,得出:τ不能正确反映兴奋性的变化,因而τ不能作为兴奋性指标;i·t·c的移动一般较为正确反映兴奋性变化的方向;去掉b后的i·t·c才能正确反映兴奋性及其变化,而a是从数量上反映去掉b后i·t·c的变化,并且测定较为简便。因此,我们推荐a在临床上广泛使用。
Excitability is one of the most basic characteristics of living tissue, and indicators of excitability have been quite chaotic. Lapicque’s time-value (τ) has been popular for some time and still has some impact so far, but i · t · c is actually used instead of τ. Later, one of the authors proposed Ti, a and It. Recently, Hou made a further analysis, advocated the use of standard electricity (a) as an indicator of excitability. We used a single square wave electrical stimulation pain method, measured in 20 cases of clinical patients τ, i · t · c and a. From the analysis and comparison of the test results, it is concluded that τ can not correctly reflect the change of excitability, therefore, τ can not be used as an index of excitability; the movement of i · t · c generally correctly reflects the direction of excitability change; i · t · c to correctly reflect the excitability and its changes, and a is quantitatively reflect the removal of b after i · t · c changes, and the determination is relatively simple. Therefore, we recommend a widely used in clinical practice.