The influence of anesthesia on intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during spinal surgeries

被引:6
|
作者
Benuska, J. [1 ]
Plisova, M. [1 ]
Zabka, M. [1 ]
Horvath, J. [1 ]
Tisovsky, P. [1 ]
Novorolsky, K. [1 ]
机构
[1] Comenius Univ Hosp, Dept Orthoped & Trauma Surg, Ruzinovska 6, SK-82606 Bratislava, Slovakia
关键词
neuromonitoring; MEP; motor evoked potential; spinal deformity; anesthesia; propofol; sufentanil; ketamine; amplitude; MOTOR-EVOKED-POTENTIALS; TRANSCRANIAL ELECTRIC MOTOR; GENERAL-ANESTHESIA; CORTEX STIMULATION; PROPOFOL; KETAMINE; ISOFLURANE; SCOLIOSIS; INCREASES; RESPONSES;
D O I
10.4149/BLL_2019_133
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Intraoperative neuromonitoring using tc-MEPs satisfactorily detects motor tract integrity changes during spinal surgery. However, tc-MEP is affected by anesthesia and other factors, in which the stimulation threshold increases because the waveform amplitude decreases over time with the accumulation and boluses of anesthetics. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of 139 patients. The average age was 30 years. Tc-MEPs were recorded bilaterally from the tibialis anterior muscle and the abductor hallucis muscle. Statistical tests were used to investigate the changes to evaluate anesthetic effects. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in tc-MEP amplitude change (%) between the groups of propofol (13 %), remifentanil (22 %) and sufentanil (26 %, p < 0.01). Significant differences were found between the groups of propofol, remifentanil, and sufentanil (20 %) and bolus sufentanil (-30 %), and bolus ketamine (730 %, p < 0.008). Major differences were observed between bolus sufentanil (-30 %) and bolus ketamine (730 %, p < 0.001). When comparing tc-MEPs with no amplitude, no significant difference was found between the groups of propofol (26 %), remifentanil (24 %), and sufentanil (28 %, p < 0.007). Substantial difference was found between the groups of propofol, remifentanil, and sufentanil (mean 26 %) and the group where ketamine boluses were administered. We didn't observe any loss of amplitude (0 %, p < 0.0002). CONCLUSION: IONM may be useless in patients where boluses of sufentanil are administered and also with Medical Research Council grades 3 and below. Consider applying IONM in patients with severe spinal deformity along with a higher age of over 50 and neurological deficit. Increasing stimulus intensity or facilitation techniques may be considered to improve the usefulness of tc-MEP. Our concept of findings supports the neurophysiological monitoring findings in other studies (Tab. 10, Ref. 45).
引用
收藏
页码:794 / 801
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring
    Lopez, JR
    INTERNATIONAL ANESTHESIOLOGY CLINICS, 1996, 34 (04) : 33 - 54
  • [42] Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during spinal surgery: technical review in open and minimally invasive approaches
    Cofano, Fabio
    Zenga, Francesco
    Mammi, Marco
    Altieri, Roberto
    Marengo, Nicola
    Ajello, Marco
    Pacca, Paolo
    Melcarne, Antonio
    Junemann, Carola
    Ducati, Alessandro
    Garbossa, Diego
    NEUROSURGICAL REVIEW, 2019, 42 (02) : 297 - 307
  • [43] Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during spinal surgery: technical review in open and minimally invasive approaches
    Fabio Cofano
    Francesco Zenga
    Marco Mammi
    Roberto Altieri
    Nicola Marengo
    Marco Ajello
    Paolo Pacca
    Antonio Melcarne
    Carola Junemann
    Alessandro Ducati
    Diego Garbossa
    Neurosurgical Review, 2019, 42 : 297 - 307
  • [44] Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during the surgery of spinal arteriovenous malformation: sensitivity, specificity, and warning criteria
    Li, Xiaoyu
    Zhang, Hong-Qi
    Ling, Feng
    He, Chuan
    Hu, Peng
    Hu, Tao
    Yu, Jiaxing
    CLINICAL NEUROLOGY AND NEUROSURGERY, 2018, 165 : 29 - 37
  • [45] Multimodal Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring in Spine Surgeries: The Experience at a Spine Centre through Years
    Rajappa, Deepak
    Khan, Mohd Mazhar
    Masapu, Dheeraj
    Manchala, Ravi
    Rudrappa, Satish
    Gopal, Swaroop
    Govindasamy, Ramachandran
    Horasuku, Sunil Kumar
    ASIAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2021, 15 (06) : 728 - 738
  • [46] Perils of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring: analysis of "false-negative" results in spine surgeries
    Tamkus, Arvydas A.
    Rice, Kent S.
    McCaffrey, Michael T.
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2018, 18 (02): : 276 - 284
  • [47] Role of Intraoperative Neurophysiological Monitoring in Pediatric Tethered Cord Syndrome Surgeries and Technical Insights
    Elmesallamy, Wael Abd Elrahman Ali
    Kamel, Alshaimaa Abdel Fattah
    Fahmy, Ahmad
    Elbana, Mohamed
    Taha, Mahmoud M.
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2025,
  • [48] Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during surgery for Chiari malformations
    Sala, Francesco
    Squintani, Giovanna
    Tramontano, Vincenzo
    Coppola, Angela
    Gerosa, Massimo
    NEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES, 2011, 32 : 317 - 319
  • [49] Neurophysiological Intraoperative Monitoring During Aortic Arch Surgery
    Keenan, Jeffrey E.
    Benrashid, Ehsan
    Kale, Emily
    Nicoara, Alina
    Husain, Aatif M.
    Hughes, G. Chad
    SEMINARS IN CARDIOTHORACIC AND VASCULAR ANESTHESIA, 2016, 20 (04) : 273 - 282
  • [50] Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during spine surgery: a review
    Gonzalez, Andres A.
    Jeyanandarajan, Dhiraj
    Hansen, Chris
    Zada, Gabriel
    Hsieh, Patrick C.
    NEUROSURGICAL FOCUS, 2009, 27 (04) : E6.1 - E6.10