Literature DB >> 30138733

Combined Motor Evoked Potential Monitoring and Subcortical Dynamic Mapping in Motor Eloquent Tumors Allows Safer and Extended Resections.

Aliasgar Moiyadi1, Parthiban Velayutham2, Prakash Shetty2, Kathleen Seidel3, Amit Janu4, Venkatesh Madhugiri5, Vikas Kumar Singh2, Aditya Patil2, Robin John2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Subcortical motor mapping is crucial to ensure preservation of motor tracts during resections of tumors. Continuous dynamic mapping using a modified monopolar suction probe is a novel and effective way of achieving this goal. We describe our experience using this technique.
METHODS: Forty patients were operated on between June 2017 and February 2018. Transcranial electric stimulation (TES) and direct cortical strip (DCS) motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were monitored. Subcortical stimulation (SCS) mapping was attempted in all cases by adapting the technique using a monopolar suction stimulator. Neurologic outcomes and extent of resection were analyzed.
RESULTS: Motor fibers were between 0 and 7.6 mm away from the tumor boundaries in 26 patients. TES MEP were monitored in all patients. DCS MEPs were attempted in 31 and successfully monitored in 26 patients. SCS using the monopolar suction probe worked in all patients except one. SCS elicited no responses at 15-mA motor thresholds in 16 patients. The motor threshold ranged from 3 to 10 mA in the remainder. Overall, MEP changes were noted in 5 patients. Ten patients experienced neurologic worsening (6 transient, 3 prolonged, and 1 delayed). There was no permanent deficit at 3 months. DCS MEPs predicted neurologic worsening better than did TES MEPs. Radical resections were achieved in 68%. Neuromonitoring inputs resulted in premature termination of resection in 14 patients (35%). Radical resections (near-total resections) were still achieved in 8 of the 14 patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Continuous dynamic subcortical mapping is a reliable method to map the motor tracts. This process is crucial to correctly identify truly eloquent tumors and tailor the surgical procedure as per planned goals, maximizing the resections with acceptable morbidity.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Corticospinal tracts; Dynamic mapping; Monopolar stimulator; Motor eloquent tumors; Subcortical mapping

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30138733     DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.08.046

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World Neurosurg        ISSN: 1878-8750            Impact factor:   2.104


  8 in total

1.  The corticotegmental connectivity as an integral component of the descending extrapyramidal pathway: novel and direct structural evidence stemming from focused fiber dissections.

Authors:  Spyridon Komaitis; Faidon Liakos; Aristotelis V Kalyvas; Evangelos Drosos; Georgios P Skandalakis; Eleftherios Neromyliotis; Apostolos Gerogiannis; Theodore Troupis; George Stranjalis; Christos Koutsarnakis
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 3.042

Review 2.  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

3.  Motor Mapping of the Brain: Taniguchi Versus Penfield Method.

Authors:  Faisal R Jahangiri; Marie Liang; Shabab S Kabir; Oly Khowash
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-05-11

Review 4.  Clinical Pearls and Methods for Intraoperative Motor Mapping.

Authors:  Marco Rossi; Tommaso Sciortino; Marco Conti Nibali; Lorenzo Gay; Luca Viganò; Guglielmo Puglisi; Antonella Leonetti; Henrietta Howells; Luca Fornia; Gabriella Cerri; Marco Riva; Lorenzo Bello
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2021-02-16       Impact factor: 4.654

5.  Correlation between intraoperative mapping and monitoring and functional outcomes following supratentorial glioma surgery.

Authors:  Han-Lin Wu; Po-Cheng Hsu; Sanford P C Hsu; Chun-Fu Lin; Kwong-Kum Liao; Kai-Ming Yang; Chen-Liang Chou; Tsui-Fen Yang
Journal:  Tzu Chi Med J       Date:  2021-04-05

6.  Transcranial versus direct electrical stimulation for intraoperative motor-evoked potential monitoring: Prognostic value comparison in asleep brain tumor surgery.

Authors:  Luca Viganò; Vincenzo Callipo; Marta Lamperti; Marco Rossi; Marco Conti Nibali; Tommaso Sciortino; Lorenzo Gay; Guglielmo Puglisi; Antonella Leonetti; Gabriella Cerri; Lorenzo Bello
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-09-29       Impact factor: 5.738

7.  Preoperative nTMS and Intraoperative Neurophysiology - A Comparative Analysis in Patients With Motor-Eloquent Glioma.

Authors:  Tizian Rosenstock; Mehmet Salih Tuncer; Max Richard Münch; Peter Vajkoczy; Thomas Picht; Katharina Faust
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-05-21       Impact factor: 6.244

8.  Threshold variation of transcranial motor evoked potential with threshold criterion in frontotemporal craniotomy.

Authors:  Kohei Kanaya; Tetsuya Goto; Tetsuyoshi Horiuchi; Kazuhiro Hongo
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol Pract       Date:  2019-09-04
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.