Literature DB >> 12172294

Amplitudes and intrapatient variability of myogenic motor evoked potentials to transcranial electrical stimulation during ketamine/N2O- and propofol/N2O-based anesthesia.

Satoki Inoue1, Masahiko Kawaguchi, Meiko Kakimoto, Takanori Sakamoto, Katsuyasu Kitaguchi, Hitoshi Furuya, Tetsuya Morimoto, Toshisuke Sakaki.   

Abstract

The aim of the current study was to investigate whether there are differences in amplitudes and intrapatient variability of motor evoked potentials to five pulses of transcranial electrical stimulation between ketamine/N2O- and propofol/N2O-based anesthesia. Patients in the propofol group (n = 13) and the ketamine group (n = 13) were anesthetized with 50% N2O in oxygen, fentanyl, and 4 mg/kg/hr of propofol or 1 mg/kg/hr of ketamine, respectively. The level of neuromuscular blockade was maintained at an M-response amplitude of approximately 50% of control. Motor evoked potentials in response to multipulse transcranial electrical stimulation were recorded from the right adductor pollicis brevis muscle, and peak-to-peak amplitude and onset latency of motor evoked potentials were evaluated. To estimate intrapatient variability, the coefficient of variation (standard deviation/mean x 100%) of 24 consecutive responses was determined. Motor evoked potential amplitudes in the ketamine group were significantly larger than in the propofol group (mean, 10th-90th percentile: 380 microV, 129-953 microV; 135 microV, 38-658 microV, respectively; P <.05). There were no significant differences in motor evoked potential latency (mean +/- standard deviation: 20.9 +/- 2.2 msec and 21.4 +/- 2.2 msec, respectively) and coefficient of variation of amplitudes (median [range]: 32% [22-42%] and 26% [18-41%], respectively) and latencies (mean +/- standard deviation: 2.1 +/- 0.7% and 2.1 +/- 0.7%, respectively) between the ketamine and propofol groups. In conclusion, intrapatient variability of motor evoked potentials to multipulse transcranial stimulation is similar between ketamine/N2O- and propofol/N2O-based anesthesia, although motor evoked potential amplitudes are lower during propofol/N2O-based anesthesia than ketamine/N2O-based anesthesia.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12172294     DOI: 10.1097/00008506-200207000-00007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg Anesthesiol        ISSN: 0898-4921            Impact factor:   3.956


  4 in total

Review 1.  A practical guide for anesthetic management during intraoperative motor evoked potential monitoring.

Authors:  Masahiko Kawaguchi; Hiroki Iida; Satoshi Tanaka; Naokazu Fukuoka; Hironobu Hayashi; Shunsuke Izumi; Kenji Yoshitani; Manabu Kakinohana
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2019-10-19       Impact factor: 2.078

2.  Evaluation of the Effect of Continuous Infusion of Dexmedetomidine or a Subanesthetic Dose Ketamine on Transcranial Electrical Motor Evoked Potentials in Adult Patients Undergoing Elective Spine Surgery under Total Intravenous Anesthesia: A Randomized Controlled Exploratory Study.

Authors:  Roshan Andleeb; Sanjay Agrawal; Priyanka Gupta
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2021-08-20

3.  Neurophysiologic intraoperative monitoring in children with Down syndrome.

Authors:  Akash J Patel; Satish Agadi; Jonathan G Thomas; Robert J Schmidt; Steven W Hwang; Daniel H Fulkerson; Chris D Glover; Andrew Jea
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2012-10-23       Impact factor: 1.475

4.  Comparison of Propofol and Ketofol on Transcranial Motor Evoked Potentials in Patients Undergoing Thoracolumbar Spine Surgery.

Authors:  Ankur Khandelwal; Arvind Chaturvedi; Navdeep Sokhal; Akanksha Singh; Hanjabam Barun Sharma
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2021-05-20
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.