Literature DB >> 7645700

The TOF-Guard neuromuscular transmission monitor. A comparison with the Myograph 2000.

P B Loan1, L D Paxton, R K Mirakhur, F M Connolly, E P McCoy.   

Abstract

The TOF-Guard neuromuscular monitor uses an accelerometer to measure the response to nerve stimulation. In this study, we have compared it to a standard mechanomyographic monitor, the Myograph 2000, for neuromuscular monitoring in 28 subjects. A train-of-four mode of stimulation was used in both cases. The times taken for onset of block, and for the recovery of T1 (the first response in the train of four) to 25% of control, the time from recovery of T1 from 25-75% and for the recovery of the train of four ratio to 0.7 were compared with the two monitors. There was a good correlation between the two devices for both onset and recovery times. However, differences were highlighted when the data were analysed by the method of Bland and Altman. The 95% limits of agreement for the T1 recovery to 25%, as measured by the TOF-Guard, ranged from 5 min less to 8 min more than when measured by the Myograph 2000. For recovery of the train of four ratio to 0.7, the limits of agreement were approximately 6 min in either direction. The 95% limits for the TOF-Guard measured train of four ratio were from 0.47 to 0.99, at the Myograph reading of 0.7. We recommend that information from the TOF-Guard and the Myograph 2000 should not be used interchangeably. However, the TOF-Guard is likely to improve considerably on tactile evaluation of the responses to stimulation.

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7645700     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1995.tb06097.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anaesthesia        ISSN: 0003-2409            Impact factor:   6.955


  7 in total

1.  Mindray 3-directional NMT Module (a new generation "Tri-axial" neuromuscular monitor) versus the Relaxometer mechanomyograph and versus the TOF-Watch SX acceleromyograph.

Authors:  Ashraf A Dahaba; Ismet Suljevic; Zhao Yang Xiao; Kun Wang
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 2.502

2.  Train-of-Four monitoring: overestimation.

Authors:  Jeong Uk Han
Journal:  Korean J Anesthesiol       Date:  2011-05-31

3.  Selective versus non-selective neural stimulation in the monitoring of muscular relaxation during general anesthesia.

Authors:  J Rodiera; R Calabuig; A Gual
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 2.502

4.  New equipment for neuromuscular transmission monitoring: a comparison of the TOF-Guard with the Myograph 2000.

Authors:  H Kirkegaard-Nielsen; H S Helbo-Hansen; P Lindholm; H S Pedersen; I K Severinsen; M B Schmidt
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 2.502

5.  The construction and evaluation of a device for mechanomyography in anaesthetized Göttingen minipigs.

Authors:  R Eddie Clutton; Kosala Dissanayake; Holly Lawson; Keith Simpson; Adrian Thompson; Michael Eddleston
Journal:  Vet Anaesth Analg       Date:  2012-07-13       Impact factor: 1.648

6.  Effect of mivacurium 200 and 250 &mgr;g/kg in infants during isoflurane anesthesia: a randomized controlled trial [ISRCTN07742712].

Authors:  Alejandro A Nava-Ocampo; Ferel T Aguirre-Garay; Elvia Y Velázquez-Armenta; Diana Moyao-García
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 2.217

7.  Advances in anesthesia technology are improving patient care, but many challenges remain.

Authors:  D John Doyle; Ashraf A Dahaba; Yannick LeManach
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2018-04-13       Impact factor: 2.217

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.