Augmentation of motor evoked potentials using multi-train transcranial electrical stimulation in intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring during spinal surgery
- 409 Downloads
Transcranial motor evoked potentials (TcMEPs) are widely used to monitor motor function during spinal surgery. Improvements in transcranial stimulation techniques and general anesthesia have made it possible to record reliable and reproducible potentials. However, TcMEPs are much smaller in amplitude compared with compound muscle action potentials (CMAPs) evoked by maximal peripheral nerve stimulation. In this study, multi-train transcranial electrical stimulation (mt-TES) was introduced to enhance TcMEPs, and the optimal setting of mt-TES was investigated. In 30 patients undergoing surgical correction of spinal deformities (4 males and 26 females with normal motor status; age range 11–75 years), TcMEPs from the abductor hallucis (AH) and quadriceps femoris (QF) were analyzed. A multipulse (train) stimulus with an individual pulse width of 0.5 ms and an inter-pulse interval of 2 ms was delivered repeatedly (2–7 times) at different rates (2, 5, and 10 Hz). TcMEP amplitudes increased with the number of train stimuli for AH, with the strongest facilitation observed at 5 Hz. The response amplitude increased 6.1 times on average compared with single-train transcranial electrical stimulation (st-TES). This trend was also observed in the QF. No adverse events (e.g., seizures, cardiac arrhythmias, scalp burns, accidental injury resulting from patient movement) were observed in any patients. Although several facilitative techniques using central or peripheral stimuli, preceding transcranial electrical stimulation, have been recently employed to augment TcMEPs during surgery, responses are still much smaller than CMAPs. Changing from conventional st-TES to mt-TES has potential to greatly enhance TcMEP responses.
KeywordsIntraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring Motor evoked potential Multi-train transcranial electrical stimulation Spinal surgery
The experiments comply with the current laws of Japan.
Conflict of interest
- 12.Langeloo DD, Lelivelt A, Louis JH, Slappendel R, de Kleuver M. Transcranial electrical motor-evoked potential monitoring during surgery for spinal deformity: a study of 145 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28:1043–50.Google Scholar
- 13.Hilibrand AS, Schwartz DM, Sethuraman V, Vaccaro AR, Albert TJ. Comparison of transcranial electric motor and somatosensory evoked potential monitoring during cervical spine surgery. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 2004;86:1248–53.Google Scholar
- 15.Sakaki K, Kawabata S, Ukegawa D, Hirai T, Ishii S, Tomori M, Inose H, Yoshii T, Tomizawa S, Kato T, Shinomiya K, Okawa A. Warning thresholds on the basis of origin of amplitude changes in transcranial electrical motor-evoked potential monitoring for cervical compression myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37:E913–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Muramoto A, Imagama S, Ito Z, Wakao N, Ando K, Tauchi R, Hirano K, Matsui H, Matsumoto T, Matsuyama Y, Ishigro N. The cutoff amplitude of transcranial motor-evoked potentials for predicting postoperative motor deficits in thoracic spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38:E21–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Kakimoto M, Kawaguchi M, Yamamoto Y, Inoue S, Horiuchi T, Nakase H, Sakaki T, Furuya H. Tetanic stimulation of the peripheral nerve before transcranial electrical stimulation can enlarge amplitudes of myogenic motor evoked potentials during general anesthesia with neuromuscular blockade. Anesthesiology. 2005;102:733–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.Matsuda H, Shimazu A. Intraoperative spinal cord monitoring using electric responses to stimulation of caudal spinal cord or motor cortex. In: Desmedt JE, editor. Neuromonitoring in surgery. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1989. p. 175–90.Google Scholar