Literature DB >> 15035273

Monitoring of motor evoked potentials compared with somatosensory evoked potentials and microvascular Doppler ultrasonography in cerebral aneurysm surgery.

Georg Neuloh1, Johannes Schramm.   

Abstract

OBJECT: The aims of this study were to compare the efficiency of motor evoked potentials (MEPs), somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs), and microvascular Doppler ultrasonography (MDU) in the detection of impending motor impairment from subcortical ischemia in aneurysm surgery; to determine their sensitivity for specific intraoperative events; and to compare their impact on the surgical strategy used.
METHODS: Motor evoked potentials, SSEPs, and MDU were monitored during 100 operations for 129 aneurysms in 95 patients. Intraoperative events, monitoring results, and clinical outcome were correlated in a prospective observational design. Motor evoked potentials indicated inadequate temporary clipping, inadvertent occlusion, inadequate retraction, vasospasm, or compromise to perforating vessels in 21 of 33 instances and deteriorated despite stable SSEPs in 18 cases. Microvascular Doppler ultrasonography revealed inadvertent vessel occlusion in eight of 10 cases and insufficient clipping in four of four cases. Stable evoked potentials (EPs) allowed safe, permanent vessel occlusion or narrowing despite reduced flow on MDU in five cases. Two patients sustained permanent and 10 showed transient new weakness, which had been detected by SSEPs in two of 12 patients and MEPs in 10 of 11 monitored cases. The surgical strategy was directly altered in 33 instances: by MEPs in 16, SSEPs in four, and MDU in 13.
CONCLUSIONS: Monitoring of MEPs is superior to SSEP monitoring and MDU in detecting motor impairment, particularly that from subcortical ischemia. Microvascular Doppler ultrasonography is superior to EP monitoring in detecting inadvertent vessel occlusion, but cannot assess remote collateral flow. Motor evoked potentials are most sensitive to all other intraoperative conditions and have a direct influence on the course of surgery in the majority of events. A controlled study design is required to confirm the positive effect of monitoring on clinical outcome in aneurysm surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15035273     DOI: 10.3171/jns.2004.100.3.0389

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg        ISSN: 0022-3085            Impact factor:   5.115


  30 in total

1.  Multilobar electrocorticography monitoring during intracranial aneurysm surgery.

Authors:  A R Dehdashti; E Pralong; D Debatisse; L Regli
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 3.210

2.  Combined motor and somatosensory evoked potentials for intraoperative monitoring: intra- and postoperative data in a series of 69 operations.

Authors:  M R Weinzierl; P Reinacher; J M Gilsbach; V Rohde
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2007-01-13       Impact factor: 3.042

Review 3.  Muscle relaxant use during intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring.

Authors:  Tod B Sloan
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2012-09-27       Impact factor: 2.502

Review 4.  Commentary : The value of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring: evidence, equipoise and outcomes.

Authors:  R N Holdefer; S A Skinner
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 2.502

5.  Adenosine-assisted clipping of intracranial aneurysms.

Authors:  Torstein R Meling; Luis Romundstad; Geir Niemi; Jon Narum; Per Kristian Eide; Angelika G Sorteberg; Wilhelm A Sorteberg
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2017-08-17       Impact factor: 3.042

6.  Diagnostic impact of monitoring transcranial motor-evoked potentials to prevent ischemic complications during endovascular treatment for intracranial aneurysms.

Authors:  Ichiro Nakagawa; HunSoo Park; Masashi Kotsugi; Yasushi Motoyama; Kaoru Myochin; Yasuhiro Takeshima; Ryosuke Matsuda; Fumihiko Nishimura; Syuichi Yamada; Tsunenori Takatani; Kimihiko Kichikawa; Hiroyuki Nakase
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2020-06-23       Impact factor: 3.042

7.  The role of intraoperative micro-Doppler ultrasound in verifying proper clip placement in intracranial aneurysm surgery.

Authors:  Ioannis Siasios; Eftychia Z Kapsalaki; Kostas N Fountas
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 2.804

Review 8.  [Intraoperative electrophysiological monitoring with evoked potentials].

Authors:  R Nitzschke; N Hansen-Algenstaedt; J Regelsberger; A E Goetz; M S Goepfert
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 1.041

9.  Feasibility and efficacy of transcranial motor-evoked potential monitoring in neuroendovascular surgery.

Authors:  T G Horton; M Barnes; S Johnson; P C Kalapos; A Link; K M Cockroft
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2012-04-19       Impact factor: 3.825

10.  Predictive value of neurophysiologic monitoring during neurovascular intervention for postoperative new neurologic deficits.

Authors:  Sungjoon Lee; Doo Young Kim; Su Bin Kim; Woojin Kim; Mi-Ri Kang; Hye-Jin Kim; Ki Hwa Lee; Minwook Yoo; Byung-Sam Choi; Jung Soo Kim; Sun-Il Lee; Hae Yu Kim; Sung-Chul Jin
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2018-10-17       Impact factor: 2.804

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.