Literature DB >> 15290416

A comparison of the absolute amplitude of motor evoked potentials among groups of patients with various concentrations of nitrous oxide.

Takayuki Kunisawa1, Osamu Nagata, Minoru Nomura, Hiroshi Iwasaki, Makoto Ozaki.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: It has been shown in previous studies that nitrous oxide (N(2)O) suppresses the amplitude of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) in individual subjects. In the present study, we compared the absolute amplitude and latency of MEPs among groups of patients with various concentrations of N(2)O.
METHODS: The subjects were 60 patients who were scheduled to undergo craniotomy with MEP monitoring. Anesthesia was induced and maintained with propofol and fentanyl. The patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups based on the concentration of N(2)O: 0% N(2)O (N0 group), 50% N(2)O (N50 group), and 66% N(2)O (N66 group). MEPs were elicited by transcranial electrical stimulation. The effect-site concentrations (ESCs) of anesthetics were calculated retrospectively. The effects of anesthetics on MEP were analyzed by analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) followed by Tukey's method.
RESULTS: MEPs were elicited in all cases. The absolute amplitude of the MEP was significantly higher in the N0 group than in the N50 and N66 groups [4.16 +/- 0.42 vs 1.00 +/- 0.26 mV and 1.00 +/- 0.27 mV, respectively (mean +/- SD); P < 0.05]. In contrast, there was no significant difference in the latency of the MEP among the three groups of subjects (N0: 16.64 +/- 0.72, N50: 16.78 +/- 0.66, and N66: 16.82 +/- 0.63 ms).
CONCLUSION: The results suggest that N(2)O can suppress the absolute amplitude of the MEP in patients under propofol and fentanyl anesthesia. Although monitoring of MEP as a trend is feasible even if N(2)O is used, the use of N(2)O may be better avoided.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15290416     DOI: 10.1007/s00540-004-0245-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anesth        ISSN: 0913-8668            Impact factor:   2.078


  3 in total

1.  A comparison of the effects of desflurane versus propofol on transcranial motor-evoked potentials in pediatric patients.

Authors:  Robert N Holdefer; Corrie Anderson; Michele Furman; Yoro Sangare; Jefferson C Slimp
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2014-08-13       Impact factor: 1.475

Review 2.  Current approach on spinal cord monitoring: the point of view of the neurologist, the anesthesiologist and the spine surgeon.

Authors:  Thomas N Pajewski; Vincent Arlet; Lawrence H Phillips
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-07-10       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Anesthesia and evoked responses in neurosurgery.

Authors:  Suren Soghomonyan; Kenneth R Moran; Gurneet S Sandhu; Sergio D Bergese
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2014-04-14       Impact factor: 5.810

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.