Bite injuries caused by transcranial electrical stimulation motor-evoked potentials’ monitoring: incidence, associated factors, and clinical course
The incidence of bite injuries associated with transcranial electrical stimulation motor-evoked potentials monitoring reportedly ranges from 0.13 to 0.19%. However, in clinical practice, bite injuries appear to occur more frequently than previously reported. Our aim was to identify the incidence of and perioperative risk factors associated with bite injuries caused by transcranial electrical stimulation motor-evoked potential monitoring.
Patients who underwent elective surgery with transcranial electrical stimulation motor-evoked potential monitoring at a single tertiary hospital in Japan between June 2017 and December 2017 were included in this study. All patients were assessed by oral surgeons preoperatively and postoperatively. The associated factors with bite injuries were explored by the univariate analysis.
12 of 186 patients experienced 13 bite injuries, including three lip, six oral mucosa, and four tongue injuries. No patient required suture repair. 11 of 12 patients had uneventful postoperative courses and were cured within 12 postoperative days. One patient with a tongue ulcer and a hematoma had difficulty in oral intake and persistent dysgeusia. Patient severe movement during transcranial electrical stimulation motor-evoked potential monitoring was associated with bite injuries (p = 0.03).
The incidence of bite injuries assessed by oral surgeons was 6.5% in patients with transcranial electrical stimulation motor-evoked potential monitoring, and the patients with severe movement during the monitoring tended to incur bite injuries. In rare cases, transcranial electrical stimulation motor-evoked potential monitoring may cause difficulty in oral intake and dysgeusia.
KeywordsBite injury Motor-evoked potentials Transcranial electrical stimulation Intraoperative movement
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
- 2.Motoyama Y, Kawaguchi M, Yamada S, Nakagawa I, Nishimura F, Hironaka Y, Park YS, Hayashi H, Abe R, Nakase H. Evaluation of combined use of transcranial and direct cortical motor evoked potential monitoring during unruptured aneurysm surgery. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 2011;51:15–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Yamamoto Y, Kawaguchi M, Hayashi H, Horiuchi T, Inoue S, Nakase H, Sakaki T, Furuya H. The effects of the neuromuscular blockade levels on amplitudes of posttetanic motor-evoked potentials and movement in response to transcranial stimulation in patients receiving propofol and fentanyl anesthesia. Anesth Analg. 2008;106:930–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar