Literature DB >> 2031472

Direct spinal versus peripheral nerve stimulation as monitoring techniques in epidurally recorded spinal cord potentials.

T Morioka1, S Tobimatsu, K Fujii, H Nakagaki, M Fukui, M Kato, K Shibata, S Takahashi.   

Abstract

We recorded spinal cord evoked potentials (SCEPs) and spinal somatosensory evoked potentials (spinal SEPs) in 30 operations following stimulation of the epidural spinal cord and the peripheral nerve, respectively, to compare their feasibility as an intraoperative technique for spinal cord monitoring. SCEPs produced quicker responses and had larger amplitudes with simpler waveforms. SCEPs could reflect residual function of the pathological spinal cord and predict the postoperative clinical outcome, findings which are not observed with spinal SEPs. Moreover, SCEPs had a much higher sensitivity to spinal cord insult. Therefore, we conclude that the SCEPs were more appropriate indicator than the spinal SEPs as an intra-operative monitoring method for spinal cord function.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 2031472     DOI: 10.1007/bf01418519

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)        ISSN: 0001-6268            Impact factor:   2.216


  21 in total

1.  Electrical stimulation of the brain. III. The neural damage model.

Authors:  R H Pudenz; L A Bullara; S Jacques; F T Hambrecht
Journal:  Surg Neurol       Date:  1975-10

2.  Invasive methods of somatosensory evoked potential monitoring.

Authors:  D S Dinner; H Lüders; R P Lesser; H H Morris
Journal:  J Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1986-04       Impact factor: 2.177

3.  Somatosensory evoked potential monitoring accurately predicts hemi-spinal cord damage: a case report.

Authors:  W A Friedman; R Richards
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  1988-01       Impact factor: 4.654

4.  Epidural recording of spinal electrogram in man.

Authors:  K Shimoji; H Higashi; T Kano
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1971-03

5.  Experimental nondestructive electrical stimulation of the brain and spinal cord.

Authors:  J T Mortimer; C N Shealy; C Wheeler
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  1970-05       Impact factor: 5.115

6.  Spinal cord monitoring during surgery by direct recording of somatosensory evoked potentials. Technical note.

Authors:  I R Whittle; I H Johnston; M Besser
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  1984-02       Impact factor: 5.115

7.  A new technique for intraoperative monitoring of spinal cord function: multichannel recording of spinal cord and subcortical evoked potentials.

Authors:  H Lueders; A Gurd; J Hahn; J Andrish; G Weiker; G Klem
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1982 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Intra-axial tumors of the cervicomedullary junction.

Authors:  F Epstein; J Wisoff
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 5.115

9.  Cortical potentials evoked by epidural stimulation of the cervical and thoracic spinal cord in man.

Authors:  A Berić; M R Dimitrijević; P C Sharkey; A M Sherwood
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1986-03

10.  Recording of spinal somatosensory evoked potentials for intraoperative spinal cord monitoring.

Authors:  I R Whittle; I H Johnston; M Besser
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  1986-04       Impact factor: 5.115

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.