Literature DB >> 10072007

A comparison of myogenic motor evoked responses to electrical and magnetic transcranial stimulation during nitrous oxide/opioid anesthesia.

L H Ubags1, C J Kalkman, H D Been, J H Koelman, B W Ongerboer de Visser.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Transcranial motor evoked potentials (tc-MEPs) are used to monitor spinal cord integrity intraoperatively. We compared myogenic motor evoked responses with electrical and magnetic transcranial stimuli during nitrous oxide/opioid anesthesia. In 11 patients undergoing spinal surgery, anesthesia was induced with i.v. etomidate 0.3 mg/kg and sufentanil 1.5 microg/kg and was maintained with sufentanil 0.5 microg x kg(-1) x h(-1) and N2O 50% in oxygen. Muscle relaxation was kept at 25% of control with i.v. vecuronium. Electrical stimulation was accomplished with a transcranial stimulator set at maximal output (1200 V). Magnetic transcranial stimulation was accomplished with a transcranial stimulator set at maximal output (2 T). Just before skin incision, triplicate responses to single stimuli with both modes of cortical stimulation were randomly recorded from the tibialis anterior muscles. Amplitudes and latencies were compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Bilateral tc-MEP responses were obtained in every patient with electrical stimulation. Magnetic stimulation evoked only unilateral responses in two patients. With electrical stimulation, the median tc-MEP amplitude was 401 microV (range 145-1145 microV), and latency was 32.8 +/- 2.3 ms. With magnetic stimulation, the tc-MEP amplitude was 287 microV (range 64-506 microV) (P < 0.05), and the latency was 34.7 +/- 2.1 ms (P < 0.05). We conclude that myogenic responses to magnetic transcranial stimulation are more sensitive to anesthetic-induced motoneural depression compared with those elicited by electrical transcranial stimulation. IMPLICATIONS: Transcranial motor evoked potentials are used to monitor spinal cord integrity intraoperatively. We compared the relative efficacy of electrical and magnetic transcranial stimuli in anesthetized patients. It seems that myogenic responses to magnetic transcranial stimulation are more sensitive to anesthetic-induced motoneural depression compared with electrical transcranial stimulation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10072007     DOI: 10.1097/00000539-199903000-00019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesth Analg        ISSN: 0003-2999            Impact factor:   5.108


  8 in total

Review 1.  Multimodal intraoperative monitoring: an overview and proposal of methodology based on 1,017 cases.

Authors:  Martin Sutter; Andreas Eggspuehler; Alfred Muller; Jiri Dvorak
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-07-26       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Comparison of Muscle MEPs From Transcranial Magnetic and Electrical Stimulation and Appearance of Reflexes in Horses.

Authors:  Sanne Lotte Journée; Henricus Louis Journée; Hanneke Irene Berends; Steven Michael Reed; Cornelis Marinus de Bruijn; Cathérine John Ghislaine Delesalle
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2020-09-25       Impact factor: 4.677

3.  Trapezius Motor Evoked Potentials From Transcranial Electrical Stimulation and Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation: Reference Data, Characteristic Differences and Intradural Motor Velocities in Horses.

Authors:  Sanne Lotte Journée; Henricus Louis Journée; Hanneke Irene Berends; Steven Michael Reed; Wilhelmina Bergmann; Cornelis Marinus de Bruijn; Cathérine John Ghislaine Delesalle
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-04-27       Impact factor: 5.152

4.  Differential effect of halothane on motor evoked potentials elicited by transcranial electric or magnetic stimulation in the monkey.

Authors:  Tod Sloan; J Rogers
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2009-04-24       Impact factor: 2.502

5.  Intraoperative continuous monitoring of facial motor evoked potentials in acoustic neuroma surgery.

Authors:  Hiroshi Tokimura; Sei Sugata; Hitoshi Yamahata; Shunji Yunoue; Ryosuke Hanaya; Kazunori Arita
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2014-07-13       Impact factor: 3.042

6.  Sevoflurane affects evoked electromyography monitoring in cerebral palsy.

Authors:  Xin Chen; Lufeng Xu; Yuanlin Wang; Feng Xu; Yemu Du; Jinyu Li
Journal:  Open Med (Wars)       Date:  2016-05-17

7.  Transcranial Motor Evoked Potentials during Spinal Deformity Corrections-Safety, Efficacy, Limitations, and the Role of a Checklist.

Authors:  Shankar Acharya; Nagendra Palukuri; Pravin Gupta; Manish Kohli
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2017-02-13

8.  Multipulse transcranial electrical stimulation (TES): normative data for motor evoked potentials in healthy horses.

Authors:  Sanne Lotte Journée; Henricus Louis Journée; Cornelis Marinus de Bruijn; Cathérine John Ghislaine Delesalle
Journal:  BMC Vet Res       Date:  2018-04-03       Impact factor: 2.741

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.