Stimulation parameters for motor evoked potentials during intraoperative spinal cord monitoring. A systematic review.

Autor: Dulfer SE; Department of Neurosurgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands. Electronic address: s.e.dulfer@umcg.nl., Gadella MC; Department of Neurosurgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands., Sahinovic MM; Department of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands., Lange F; Department of Neurology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands., Absalom AR; Department of Anaesthesiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands., Groen RJM; Department of Neurosurgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands., Szelényi A; Department of Neurosurgery, Hospital of the Ludwig Maximilians University Munich (LMU), Munich, Germany., Drost G; Department of Neurosurgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; Department of Neurology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology [Clin Neurophysiol] 2023 May; Vol. 149, pp. 70-80. Date of Electronic Publication: 2023 Mar 04.
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2023.02.170
Abstrakt: Objective: The aim of this systematic review was to find the optimal stimulation parameters for muscle recorded transcranial electrical stimulation motor evoked potential (mTc-MEP) and D-wave monitoring during spinal cord monitoring.
Methods: A PRISMA systematic search in Medline and EMBASE and a QUADAS-2 quality evaluation was performed to identify studies that compared stimulation parameters consisting of stimulation location, number of pulses, pulse duration, interstimulus interval, double train (DTS) or recurrent train stimulation (RTS) and intertrain interval (ITI) for performing mTc-MEP and D-wave monitoring. Only studies that used total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) were included.
Results: Ten studies that compared stimulation parameters for performing mTc-MEP monitoring (stimulation location n = 4, number of pulses n = 2, pulse duration n = 1, interstimulus interval n = 4, DTS n = 1, RTS n = 2, ITI n = 2) were included. No studies compared stimulation parameters (stimulation location and pulse duration) for performing D-wave monitoring.
Conclusions: Few studies examined the optimal stimulation parameters for monitoring mTc-MEPs and no studies were included for D-wave monitoring. There is a need for prospective research to investigate the optimal stimulation parameters for mTc-MEP with the use of TIVA and D-wave monitoring.
Significance: For mTc-MEP monitoring, a table is provided in which the recommended stimulation parameters are stated.
Competing Interests: Conflict of interest ARA reports receipt of unrestricted research funding and/or reimbursement for consultancy for The Medicines Company, Janssen Pharma, Carefusion/BD, Orion Pharma, Ever Pharma, Terumo, PAION and Philips (all for work unrelated to the current study; all payments to institution). The other authors report no conflicts of interest.
(Copyright © 2023 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: