Literature DB >> 15632537

Progressive suppression of motor evoked potentials during general anesthesia: the phenomenon of "anesthetic fade".

Russ Lyon1, John Feiner, Jeremy A Lieberman.   

Abstract

Transcranial motor evoked potentials (MEPs) are useful for assessing the integrity of spinal cord motor tracts during major spine surgery. Anesthetic agents depress the amplitude of MEPs in a dose-dependent fashion. Anecdotal reports suggest that MEP responses degrade or "fade" over the duration of a surgery, despite unchanged anesthetic levels or other physiologic variables. This phenomenon has not been systematically analyzed. We performed a retrospective study of 418 patients who underwent spine surgery at UCSF using intraoperative MEP monitoring. We excluded patients who experienced variations in physiologic parameters that might affect MEP signals and those who developed new neurologic deficits. We identified 46 neurologically intact patients and 16 myelopathic patients who had surgery performed using a constant desflurane/N2O/narcotic or desflurane/propofol/narcotic anesthetic regimen. The minimum voltage threshold needed to produce an MEP response of at least 50 microV in amplitude was recorded at the beginning ("baseline") and end of surgery. The voltage threshold was higher at the end of the case than at baseline for each patient, regardless of anesthetic regimen. In normal patients, the rate of rise of the threshold was similar for those receiving propofol (11.4 +/- 6.9 V/hr) or N2O (9.7 +/- 5.9 V/hr) (P = not significant). Myelopathic patients demonstrated a larger rate of rise in voltage threshold, 23.4 +/- 12.2 V/hr, versus normal subjects (P < 0.01). The rate of rise of voltage threshold is inversely proportional to anesthetic duration. Prolonged exposure to anesthetic agents necessitates higher stimulating thresholds to elicit MEP responses, separate from the dose-dependent depressant effect. This retrospective study is limited and cannot explain the mechanism for this observed fade in signals. Recognition of anesthetic fade is essential when interpreting changes to the MEP response to avoid false-positive findings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15632537

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


  28 in total

1.  Increases in voltage may produce false-negatives when using transcranial motor evoked potentials to detect an isolated nerve root injury.

Authors:  Russ Lyon; Anthony Gibson; Shane Burch; Jeremy Lieberman
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2011-01-05       Impact factor: 2.502

Review 2.  Clinical Electroencephalography for Anesthesiologists: Part I: Background and Basic Signatures.

Authors:  Patrick L Purdon; Aaron Sampson; Kara J Pavone; Emery N Brown
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 7.892

Review 3.  Intraoperative motor evoked potential monitoring: overview and update.

Authors:  David B Macdonald
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2006-07-11       Impact factor: 2.502

4.  The value of bilateral ipsilateral and contralateral motor evoked potential monitoring in scoliosis surgery.

Authors:  Y L Lo; Y F Dan; A Teo; Y E Tan; W M Yue; S Raman; S B Tan
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-09-14       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during complex spinal deformity cases in pediatric patients: methodology, utility, prognostication, and outcome.

Authors:  James Drake; Reinhard Zeller; Abhaya V Kulkarni; Samuel Strantzas; Laura Holmes
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2010-03-07       Impact factor: 1.475

6.  Trending algorithm discriminates hemodynamic from injury related TcMEP amplitude loss.

Authors:  Paul Jasiukaitis; Russ Lyon
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2019-02-06       Impact factor: 2.502

Review 7.  Intraoperative neuromonitoring in paediatric spinal surgery.

Authors:  D N Levin; S Strantzas; B E Steinberg
Journal:  BJA Educ       Date:  2019-03-08

8.  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

9.  Improving successful rate of transcranial electrical motor-evoked potentials monitoring during spinal surgery in young children.

Authors:  Junlin Yang; Zifang Huang; Haihua Shu; Yuguang Chen; Xinrui Sun; Weifeng Liu; Yunling Dou; Chaofan Xie; Xiang Lin; Yong Hu
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-08-30       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Intraoperative Transcranial Motor-Evoked Potential Monitoring of the Facial Nerve during Cerebellopontine Angle Tumor Resection.

Authors:  Maura K Cosetti; Ming Xu; Andrew Rivera; Daniel Jethanamest; Maggie A Kuhn; Aleksandar Beric; John G Golfinos; J Thomas Roland
Journal:  J Neurol Surg B Skull Base       Date:  2012-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.