| Literature DB >> 31195791 |
Eui-Suk Sung1, Jin-Choon Lee1, Sung-Chan Shin2, Hyun-Keun Kwon2, Han-Seul Na2, Da-Hee Park1, Seong-Wook Choi1, Jung-Hoon Ro3, Byung-Joo Lee2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The sensitivity and positive predictive value of widely used intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM) using electromyography (EMG) of the vocalis muscle in thyroid surgery are controversial. Thus, we developed a novel IONM system with an accelerometer sensor that uses the piezoelectric effect instead of EMG to detect laryngeal twitching. The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of this novel IONM system during thyroid surgery in a porcine model.Entities:
Keywords: Accelerometer Sensor; Electromyography; Neuromonitoring; Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve; Thyroidectomy
Year: 2019 PMID: 31195791 PMCID: PMC6787476 DOI: 10.21053/ceo.2019.00423
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol ISSN: 1976-8710 Impact factor: 3.372
Fig. 1.(A) Photograph of a transcutaneous accelerometer sensor. (B) Surgical field of dissection on the pig, demonstrating the accelerometer sensor attached to the anterior neck skin. (C) Illustration of surgical field with the transcutaneous accelerometer sensor.
Fig. 2.(A) Photograph of a postcricoid accelerometer sensor. (B) Intraoperative endoscopic view of larynx on the pig, demonstrating the accelerometer sensor attached postcricoid area. (C) Illustration of the postcricoid accelerometer sensor placement.
Analysis of the amplitude and latency of the EMG of vocalis muscle and transcutaneous accelerometer sensor depending on the value of the RLN stimulus in pigs
| Stimulus (mA) | EMG | Transcutaneous accelerometer sensor | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Response (n) | Amplitude (μV) | Latency (ms) | Response (n) | Amplitude (μV) | Latency (ms) | Amplitude | Latency | |
| 0.3 | 8 | 358.37±234.60 | 5.28±0.54 | 8 | 7.72±3.04 | 35.50±11.90 | ||
| 0.5 | 8 | 467.62±294.92 | 5.31±0.54 | 8 | 9.92±4.51 | 34.45±12.61 | ||
| 1.0 | 8 | 514.25±240.39 | 5.31±0.54 | 8 | 10.97±4.16 | 34.55±12.70 | ||
| 1.5 | 8 | 531.87±351.03 | 5.31±0.54 | 8 | 10.95±4.18 | 34.70±12.57 | ||
| 2.0 | 8 | 551.25±315.34 | 5.31±0.54 | 8 | 11.17±4.40 | 34.05±12.42 | ||
| 3.0 | 8 | 572.62±319.75 | 5.31±0.54 | 8 | 11.77±5.06 | 33.75±12.73 | ||
| Average | 48 | 499.33±288.60 | 5.30±0.51 | 48 | 10.42±4.25 | 34.50±11.82 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation.
EMG, electromyography; RLN, recurrent laryngeal nerve.
P-value indicates the result of the comparison test for the mean response values of the amplitude and latency between the EMG and surface accelerometer sensor depending on stimulus value.
Analysis of the amplitude and latency of the EMG of vocalis muscle and postcricoid accelerometer sensor depending on the value of the RLN stimulus in pigs
| Stimulus (mA) | EMG | Postcricoid accelerometer sensorr | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Response (n) | Amplitude (μV) | Latency (ms) | Response (n) | Amplitude (μV) | Latency (ms) | Amplitude | Latency | |
| 0.3 | 4 | 134.75±29.72 | 5.06±0.51 | 4 | 16.94±5.35 | 6.92±0.94 | ||
| 0.5 | 8 | 182.85±98.36 | 4.92±0.42 | 8 | 17.47±5.35 | 6.72±0.76 | ||
| 1.0 | 8 | 301.85±169.11 | 4.92±0.42 | 8 | 23.74±9.68 | 6.70±0.75 | ||
| 1.5 | 8 | 325.14±131.71 | 4.92±0.42 | 8 | 22.39±8.06 | 6.61±0.66 | ||
| 2.0 | 8 | 364.71±139.84 | 4.92±0.42 | 8 | 22.39±8.06 | 6.67±0.53 | ||
| 3.0 | 8 | 370.42±143.08 | 4.92±0.42 | 8 | 24.51±8.63 | 6.60±0.62 | ||
| Average | 44 | 291.12±149.32 | 4.94±0.40 | 44 | 21.51±7.88 | 6.69±0.66 | <0.001 | 0.790 |
Values are presented as mean±standard deviation.
EMG, electromyography; RLN, recurrent laryngeal nerve.
P-value indicates the result of the comparison test for the mean response values of the amplitude and latency between the EMG and surface accelerometer sensor depending on stimulus value.