Literature DB >> 27554347

Transcranial magnetic stimulation in the semi-quantitative, pre-operative assessment of patients undergoing spinal deformity surgery.

Michael A Glasby1, Athanasios I Tsirikos2, Lindsay Henderson1, Gillian Horsburgh1, Brian Jordan1, Ciara Michaelson1, Christopher I Adams1, Enrique Garrido1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare measurements of motor evoked potential latency stimulated either magnetically (mMEP) or electrically (eMEP) and central motor conduction time (CMCT) made pre-operatively in conscious patients using transcranial and intra-operatively using electrical cortical stimulation before and after successful instrumentation for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.
METHODS: A group initially of 51 patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis aged 12-19 years was evaluated pre-operatively in the outpatients' department with transcranial magnetic stimulation. The neurophysiological data were then compared statistically with intra-operative responses elicited by transcranial electrical stimulation both before and after successful surgical intervention. MEPs were measured as the cortically evoked compound action potentials of Abductor hallucis. Minimum F-waves were measured using conventional nerve conduction methods and the lower motor neuron conduction time was calculated and this was subtracted from MEP latency to give CMCT.
RESULTS: Pre-operative testing was well tolerated in our paediatric/adolescent patients. No neurological injury occurred in any patient in this series. There was no significant difference in the values of mMEP and eMEP latencies seen pre-operatively in conscious patients and intra-operatively in patients under anaesthetic. The calculated quantities mCMCT and eCMCT showed the same statistical correlations as the quantities mMEP and eMEP latency.
CONCLUSIONS: The congruency of mMEP and eMEP and of mCMCT and eCMCT suggests that these measurements may be used comparatively and semi-quantitatively for the comparison of pre-, intra-, and post-operative spinal cord function in spinal deformity surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Central motor conduction time; Intra-operative neurophysiological monitoring; Motor evoked potentials; Pre-operative assessment; Spinal deformity; Transcranial magnetic cortical stimulation

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27554347     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-016-4737-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  18 in total

1.  A practical guide to setting up a repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) service.

Authors:  Cherrie Galletly; Paul Fitzgerald; Patrick Clarke; Shane Gill; Cassandra Burton; Carol Turnbull
Journal:  Australas Psychiatry       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 1.369

2.  An evaluation of multimodal spinal cord monitoring in scoliosis surgery: a single centre experience of 354 operations.

Authors:  S Bhagat; A Durst; H Grover; J Blake; L Lutchman; A S Rai; R Crawford
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-01-25       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Scope of a technique for electrical stimulation of human brain, spinal cord, and muscle.

Authors:  P A Merton; D K Hill; H B Morton; C D Marsden
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1982-09-11       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 4.  A practical guide to the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in the treatment of depression.

Authors:  Paul B Fitzgerald; Zafiris J Daskalakis
Journal:  Brain Stimul       Date:  2011-04-17       Impact factor: 8.955

5.  The prevention of neural complications in the surgical treatment of scoliosis: the role of the neurophysiological intraoperative monitoring.

Authors:  F Pastorelli; M Di Silvestre; R Plasmati; R Michelucci; T Greggi; A Morigi; M R Bacchin; S Bonarelli; A Cioni; F Vommaro; N Fini; F Lolli; P Parisini
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-03-18       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 6.  The evidence for intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring in spine surgery: does it make a difference?

Authors:  Michael G Fehlings; Darrel S Brodke; Daniel C Norvell; Joseph R Dettori
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2010-04-20       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Preoperative functional mapping for rolandic brain tumor surgery: comparison of navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation to direct cortical stimulation.

Authors:  Thomas Picht; Sein Schmidt; Stephan Brandt; Dietmar Frey; Henri Hannula; Tuomas Neuvonen; Jari Karhu; Peter Vajkoczy; Olaf Suess
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 4.654

8.  Neurophysiological detection of impending spinal cord injury during scoliosis surgery.

Authors:  Daniel M Schwartz; Joshua D Auerbach; John P Dormans; John Flynn; Denis S Drummond; J Andrew Bowe; Samuel Laufer; Suken A Shah; J Richard Bowen; Peter D Pizzutillo; Kristofer J Jones; Denis S Drummond
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Idiopathic scoliosis: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study.

Authors:  V K Kimiskidis; M Potoupnis; S K Papagiannopoulos; G Dimopoulos; D A Kazis; K Markou; F Zara; G Kapetanos; A D Kazis
Journal:  J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact       Date:  2007 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.041

Review 10.  Transcranial magnetic stimulation in child neurology: current and future directions.

Authors:  Richard E Frye; Alexander Rotenberg; Molliann Ousley; Alvaro Pascual-Leone
Journal:  J Child Neurol       Date:  2007-12-03       Impact factor: 1.987

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Safety of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Children: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Corey H Allen; Benzi M Kluger; Isabelle Buard
Journal:  Pediatr Neurol       Date:  2017-01-04       Impact factor: 3.372

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.