Literature DB >> 2716979

Noninvasive motor evoked potential monitoring during neurosurgical operations on the spinal cord.

J Zentner1.   

Abstract

We present the results of monitoring descending pathways with motor evoked potentials (MEP) in 50 patients during neurosurgical operations on the spinal cord. The electromyographic responses of the anterior tibial muscles were recorded. In addition, in 24 patients responses of the thenar muscles after transcranial electrical stimulation of the motor cortex were recorded. Usually, the averages of 5 to 15 signals were evaluated. Although potentials were obtained preoperatively in all 50 patients, during neuroleptanesthesia intraoperative recording from the anterior tibial muscles was possible in 43 patients (86%) and from the thenar muscles in 21 patients (87.5%). Amplitudes were superior to latencies as evaluation criteria for intraoperative changes in potentials. On the basis of acceptable changes in amplitudes of up to 50% at the end of the operation, 16 recordings from the thenar muscles (76.2%) and 35 from the anterior tibial muscles (81.4%) correlated correctly with the postoperative neurological status; there were false positive results in 5 (23.8%) and 8 (18.6%) patients, respectively. We did not observe false negative findings. Postoperative neurological complications coincided in every case with permanent reduction in amplitudes of more than 50% of the base lines or with intraoperative loss of potentials as observed in 3 and 1 patient, respectively. MEP monitoring during neurosurgical operations on the spinal cord is a sensitive method for early detection of impending neurological complications. Major problems are the influence of anesthesia and the definition of acceptable limits for changes in amplitudes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2716979     DOI: 10.1227/00006123-198905000-00008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurgery        ISSN: 0148-396X            Impact factor:   4.654


  10 in total

1.  Spinal cord ischemia and motor evoked potentials.

Authors:  D J Doyle
Journal:  J Clin Monit       Date:  1990-10

2.  Predicted current densities in the brain during transcranial electrical stimulation.

Authors:  R N Holdefer; R Sadleir; M J Russell
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2006-04-27       Impact factor: 3.708

3.  False-Positive and False-Negative Results of Motor Evoked Potential Monitoring During Surgery for Intramedullary Spinal Cord Tumors.

Authors:  Ryu Kurokawa; Phyo Kim; Kazushige Itoki; Shinji Yamamoto; Tetsuro Shingo; Toshiki Kawamoto; Shunsuke Kawamoto
Journal:  Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown)       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 2.703

4.  Intraoperative transcranial electrical motor evoked potential monitoring during spinal surgery under intravenous ketamine or etomidate anaesthesia.

Authors:  L H Yang; S M Lin; W Y Lee; C C Liu
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 2.216

5.  Quantification of the proportion of motor neurons recruited by transcranial electrical stimulation during intraoperative motor evoked potential monitoring.

Authors:  Shunji Tsutsui; Hiroshi Yamada; Hiroshi Hashizume; Akihito Minamide; Yukihiro Nakagawa; Hiroshi Iwasaki; Munehito Yoshida
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2013-06-08       Impact factor: 2.502

6.  Differential effect of halothane on motor evoked potentials elicited by transcranial electric or magnetic stimulation in the monkey.

Authors:  Tod Sloan; J Rogers
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2009-04-24       Impact factor: 2.502

Review 7.  High-resolution modeling assisted design of customized and individualized transcranial direct current stimulation protocols.

Authors:  Marom Bikson; Asif Rahman; Abhishek Datta; Felipe Fregni; Lotfi Merabet
Journal:  Neuromodulation       Date:  2012-07-10

8.  Monophasic transcranial constant-current versus constant-voltage stimulation of motor-evoked potentials during spinal surgery.

Authors:  Keisuke Masuda; Hideki Shigematsu; Masato Tanaka; Eiichiro Iwata; Yusuke Yamamoto; Masahiko Kawaguchi; Tsunenori Takatani; Sachiko Kawasaki; Yasuhito Tanaka
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-03-07       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Neurological deterioration as a result of improper neck position detected by intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring in a cervical stenosis patient: A case report.

Authors:  Tong Yu; Jiu-Ping Wu; Tao He; Yao-Kuan Ruan; Qin-Yi Liu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2021-03-19       Impact factor: 1.817

Review 10.  Basic Principles and Recent Trends of Transcranial Motor Evoked Potentials in Intraoperative Neurophysiologic Monitoring.

Authors:  Shunji Tsutsui; Hiroshi Yamada
Journal:  Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo)       Date:  2016-03-02       Impact factor: 1.742

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.