Literature DB >> 28059664

Navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation for glioma removal: prognostic value in motor function recovery from postsurgical neurological deficits.

Tomokazu Takakura1,2, Yoshihiro Muragaki1,3, Manabu Tamura1,3, Takashi Maruyama1,3, Masayuki Nitta1,3, Chiharu Niki3, Takakazu Kawamata3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE The aim of the present study was to evaluate the usefulness of navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation (nTMS) as a prognostic predictor for upper-extremity motor functional recovery from postsurgical neurological deficits. METHODS Preoperative and postoperative nTMS studies were prospectively applied in 14 patients (mean age 39 ± 12 years) who had intraparenchymal brain neoplasms located within or adjacent to the motor eloquent area in the cerebral hemisphere. Mapping by nTMS was done 3 times, i.e., before surgery, and 1 week and 3 weeks after surgery. To assess the response induced by nTMS, motor evoked potential (nTMS-MEP) was recorded using a surface electromyography electrode attached to the abductor pollicis brevis (APB). The cortical locations that elicited the largest electromyography response by nTMS were defined as hotspots. Hotspots for APB were confirmed as positive responsive sites by direct electrical stimulation (DES) during awake craniotomy. The distances between hotspots and lesions (DHS-L) were measured. Postoperative neurological deficits were assessed by manual muscle test and dynamometer. To validate the prognostic value of nTMS in recovery from upper-extremity paresis, the following were investigated: 1) the correlation between DHS-L and the serial grip strength change, and 2) the correlation between positive nTMS-MEP at 1 week after surgery and the serial grip strength change. RESULTS From the presurgical nTMS study, MEPs from targeted muscles were identified in 13 cases from affected hemispheres. In one case, MEP was not evoked due to a huge tumor. Among 9 cases from which intraoperative DES mapping for hand motor area was available, hotspots for APB identified by nTMS were concordant with DES-positive sites. Compared with the adjacent group (DHS-L < 10 mm, n = 6), the nonadjacent group (DHS-L ≥ 10 mm, n = 7) showed significantly better recovery of grip strength at 3 months after surgery (p < 0.01). There were correlations between DHS-L and recovery of grip strength at 1 week, 3 weeks, and 3 months after surgery (r = 0.74, 0.68, and 0.65, respectively). Postsurgical nTMS was accomplished in 13 patients. In 9 of 13 cases, nTMS-MEP from APB muscle was positive at 1 week after surgery. Excluding the case in which nTMS-MEP was negative from the presurgical nTMS study, recoveries in grip strength were compared between 2 groups, in which nTMS-MEP at 1 week after surgery was positive (n = 9) or negative (n = 3). Significant differences were observed between the 2 groups at 1 week, 3 weeks, and 3 months after surgery (p < 0.01). Positive nTMS-MEP at 1 week after surgery correlated well with the motor recovery at 1 week, 3 weeks, and 3 months after surgery (r = 0.87, 0.88, and 0.77, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Navigated TMS is a useful tool for identifying motor eloquent areas. The results of the present study have demonstrated the predictive value of nTMS in upper-extremity motor function recovery from postsurgical neurological deficits. The longer DHS-L and positive nTMS-MEP at 1 week after surgery have prognostic values of better recovery from postsurgical neurological deficits.

Entities:  

Keywords:  5-ALA = 5-aminolevulinic acid; AH = affected hemisphere; AMT = active motor threshold; AP = anterior to posterior; APB = abductor pollicis brevis; BB = biceps brachii; DES = direct electrical stimulation; DHS-L = distance between hotspot and lesion; EMCS = epidural motor cortex stimulation; FMA = Fugl-Meyer assessment; LE = lower extremity; MMT = manual muscle testing; OO = orbicularis oris; PA = posterior to anterior; RMT = resting motor threshold; TA = tibialis anterior; Tc-MEP = transcranial MEP; UE = upper extremity; UH = unaffected hemisphere; awake craniotomy; d-MEP = direct motor evoked potential; diagnostic technique; glioma; io = intraoperative; nTMS = navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation; neurological deficit; rehabilitation; surgical technique; transcranial magnetic stimulation

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28059664     DOI: 10.3171/2016.8.JNS16442

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg        ISSN: 0022-3085            Impact factor:   5.115


  5 in total

Review 1.  Assessing the Capabilities of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) to Aid in the Removal of Brain Tumors Affecting the Motor Cortex: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Lucas Jose Vaz Schiavao; Iuri Neville Ribeiro; Cintya Yukie Hayashi; Eberval Gadelha Figueiredo; Andre Russowsky Brunoni; Manoel Jacobsen Teixeira; Gabriel Pokorny; Wellingson Silva Paiva
Journal:  Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat       Date:  2022-06-16       Impact factor: 2.989

Review 2.  Preoperative Applications of Navigated Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation.

Authors:  Alexander F Haddad; Jacob S Young; Mitchel S Berger; Phiroz E Tarapore
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2021-01-22       Impact factor: 4.003

Review 3.  Safe surgery for glioblastoma: Recent advances and modern challenges.

Authors:  Jasper Kees Wim Gerritsen; Marike Lianne Daphne Broekman; Steven De Vleeschouwer; Philippe Schucht; Brian Vala Nahed; Mitchel Stuart Berger; Arnaud Jean Pierre Edouard Vincent
Journal:  Neurooncol Pract       Date:  2022-03-02

4.  Computed tomography-guided navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation for preoperative brain motor mapping in brain lesion resection: A case report.

Authors:  Pedro Henrique da Costa Ferreira Pinto; Flavio Nigri; Egas Moniz Caparelli-Dáquer; Jucilana Dos Santos Viana
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2019-07-05

Review 5.  Comparing navigated transcranial magnetic stimulation mapping and "gold standard" direct cortical stimulation mapping in neurosurgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  Hanne-Rinck Jeltema; Ann-Katrin Ohlerth; Aranka de Wit; Michiel Wagemakers; Adrià Rofes; Roelien Bastiaanse; Gea Drost
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2020-10-03       Impact factor: 3.042

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.