Intraoperative motor evoked potentials to transcranial electrical stimulation during two anaesthetic regimens

Effect of a Low Concentration of Sevoflurane Combined With Propofol on Transcranial Electrical Stimulation Motor Evoked Potential: A Case Series

Transcranial electrical motor evoked potential (TCeMEP) is used to monitor the integrity of intraoperative motor function. Total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) is the preferred method because its effect on MEP is relatively smaller than volatile anesthetics. However, maintaining the balanced anesthesia in long-time surgery using TIVA is challenging and may sometime cause problems including body movement during microsurgery. Such problems can be avoided by intraoperative anesthesia management using a mixture of propofol and a low concentration of sevoflurane. We recorded TCeMEP under a mixture of propofol and low concentration of sevoflurane anesthesia in three cases of neurosurgery. Anesthesia was induced with a 5.0 µg/mL target-controlled infusion of propofol and 0.6 mg/kg rocuronium. General anesthesia was maintained by propofol and 0.1-0.25 µg/kg/min remifentanil infusion. After the recording of control TCeMEP, sequential inhalation of 0.2 minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) and 0.5 MAC of sevoflurane was performed. The duration of each sevoflurane inhalation was 10 minutes, and the MACs were adjusted by the patient's age. In our cases, the combination of propofol and 0.2 MAC sevoflurane suppressed the amplitude of TCeMEP to 38.0±21.7% (379.8±212.0 µV), but the amplitude was high enough for evaluation of motor function monitoring. On the other hand, the combination of 0.5 MAC sevoflurane greatly decreased the amplitude of TCeMEP to 6.3±6.0% (71.9±66.9 µV) resulting in less than 150 µV, and it was difficult to record the change in TCeMEP amplitude over time. The combination of 0.2 MAC sevoflurane with TIVA might enable TCeMEP monitoring with TIVA.

Transcranial electrical stimulation technique for induction of unilateral motor evoked potentials

OBJECTIVE

Transcranial electrical stimulation motor evoked potentials (TES-MEP) are widely used to monitor motor function; however, broad current spread and induced body movement are limitations of this technique. We herein report a localized stimulation technique for TES-MEP that induces unilateral MEP responses.

METHODS

The stimulation of C1(+)-C4(-) or C2(+)-C3(-) was performed to induce right- or left-sided muscle contraction, respectively, in 70 patients. Electromyography was recorded by placing electrodes on the bilateral abductor pollicis brevis (APB) and abductor hallucis (AH) muscles. Stimulation conditions were regulated in the range to induce unilateral muscle contractions contralateral to the anodal stimulation. The thresholds and amplitudes of TES-MEP were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

The thresholds of APB were lower than those of AH in 47 patients, AH thresholds were lower than those of APB in 6 patients, and both APB and AH started to respond at the same intensity in 15 patients. This technical stimulation induced contralateral limb contractions with a suprathreshold stimulation of 129.4 ± 35.6 mA (mean ± standard deviation) in 68 patients (97%). Amplitudes in the suprathreshold stimulation of APB and AH responses were 727.5 ± 695.7 and 403.3 ± 325.7 μV, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The C1(+)-C4/C2(+)-C3(-) stimulation in TES-MEP enables a localized stimulation to induce unilateral MEP responses.

SIGNIFICANCE

Our stimulation technique enables the stable and safe monitoring of unilateral limbs, and contributes to the reliable monitoring of motor function in neurosurgery.

The intraoperative motor-evoked potential when propofol was changed to remimazolam during general anesthesia: a case series

Remimazolam is a short-acting benzodiazepine that was approved for clinical use in 2020. We report three patients who underwent surgery for cerebral and spinal cord tumors, in whom transcranial electrical stimulation-motor-evoked potential (TES-MEP) was successfully monitored under general anesthesia with remimazolam. During total intravenous anesthesia with propofol at a target concentration of 2.7 - 3.5 µg/mL and 0.1 - 0.35 µg/kg/min of remifentanil, delayed awakening, bradycardia, and hypotension during propofol anesthesia were expected in all three cases. With patient safety as the top priority, we considered changing the anesthetic agent. Propofol was replaced with remimazolam at a loading dose of 12 mg/kg/h for a few seconds (case 3), followed by 1 mg/kg/h for maintenance (cases 1-3). TES-MEP was recorded during propofol and remimazolam administration in all three patients. Amplitudes of TES-MEP during anesthesia with propofol and remimazolam were 461.5 ± 150 µV and 590.5 ± 100.9 µV, 1542 ± 127 µV and 1698 ± 211 µV, and 581.5 ± 91.3 µV and 634 ± 82.7 µV sequentially from Case 1. Our findings suggest that intraoperative TES-MEP could be measured when anesthesia was managed with remimazolam at 1 mg/kg/h.

Feasibility and optimal choice of stimulation parameters for supramaximal stimulation of motor evoked potentials

PURPOSE

The aim was to investigate the feasibility and optimal stimulation parameters for supramaximal stimulation of muscle recorded transcranial electrical stimulation motor evoked potentials (mTc-MEP).

METHODS

Forty-seven consecutive patients that underwent scoliosis surgery were included. First, the feasibility of supramaximal stimulation was assessed for two settings (setting 1: pulse duration 0.075ms, interstimulus interval (ISI) 1.5ms; setting 2: pulse duration 0.300ms, ISI 3ms). Thereafter, three mTc-MEP parameters were considered for both settings; (1) elicitability, (2) amplitude, and (3) if supramaximal stimulation was achieved with ≥ 20 V below maximum output. Finally, ISIs (1ms-4ms) were optimized for setting 1.

RESULTS

Nine patients (19.15%) were excluded. Of the remaining patients, supramaximal stimulation was achieved in all patients for setting 1, and in 26 (68.42%) for setting 2. In one patient, mTc-MEPs were elicitable in more muscles for setting (1) Amplitudes were not significantly different. Stimulation voltage could be increased ≥ 20 V in all 38 patients for setting 1 and in 10 (38.46%) for setting (2) Optimal ISI's differed widely.

CONCLUSION

We recommend using setting 1 when monitoring mTc-MEPs with supramaximal stimulation, after which an individualized ISI optimization can be performed. Moreover, when using supramaximal stimulation, short ISI's (i.e. 1ms or 1.5ms) can be the optimal ISI for obtaining the highest mTc-MEP amplitude.

Excitability properties of mouse and human skeletal muscle fibres compared by muscle velocity recovery cycles

Mouse models of skeletal muscle channelopathies are not phenocopies of human disease. In some cases (e.g. Myotonia Congenita) the phenotype is much more severe, whilst in others (e.g. Hypokalaemic periodic paralysis) rodent physiology is protective. This suggests a species' difference in muscle excitability properties. In humans these can be measured indirectly by the post-impulse changes in conduction velocity, using Muscle Velocity Recovery Cycles (MVRCs). We performed MVRCs in mice and compared their muscle excitability properties with humans. Mouse Tibialis Anterior MVRCs (n = 70) have only one phase of supernormality (increased conduction velocity), which is smaller in magnitude (p = 9 × 10-21), and shorter in duration (p = 3 × 10-24) than human (n = 26). This abbreviated supernormality is followed by a period of late subnormality (reduced velocity) in mice, which overlaps in time with the late supernormality seen in human MVRCs. The period of late subnormality suggests increased t-tubule Na+/K+-pump activity. The subnormal phase in mice was converted to supernormality by blocking ClC-1 chloride channels, suggesting relatively higher chloride conductance in skeletal muscle. Our findings help explain discrepancies in phenotype between mice and humans with skeletal muscle channelopathies and potentially other neuromuscular disorders. MVRCs are a valuable new tool to compare in vivo muscle membrane properties between species and will allow further dissection of the molecular mechanisms regulating muscle excitability.

Perioperative Care of Patients Undergoing Major Complex Spinal Instrumentation Surgery: Clinical Practice Guidelines From the Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care

Evidence-based standardization of the perioperative management of patients undergoing complex spine surgery can improve outcomes such as enhanced patient satisfaction, reduced intensive care and hospital length of stay, and reduced costs. The Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care (SNACC) tasked an expert group to review existing evidence and generate recommendations for the perioperative management of patients undergoing complex spine surgery, defined as surgery on 2 or more thoracic and/or lumbar spine levels. Institutional clinical management protocols can be constructed based on the elements included in these clinical practice guidelines, and the evidence presented.

Effect of dexmedetomidine on evoked-potential monitoring in patients undergoing brain stem and supratentorial cranial surgery

BACKGROUND

Dexmedetomidine is used as adjuvant in total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA), but there have been few studies concerning its effect on intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) during cranial surgery. Our aim was to study the effect of dexmedetomidine on IONM in patients undergoing brain stem and supratentorial cranial surgery.

METHODS

Two prospective, randomized, double-blind substudies were conducted. In substudy 1, during TIVA with an infusion of propofol and remifentanil, 10 patients received saline solution (SS) (PR group) and another 10 (PRD group) received dexmedetomidine (0.5 mcg/kg/h). Total dosage of propofol and remifentanil, intensity, latency and amplitude of motor-evoked potentials following transcranial electrical stimulation (tcMEPs) as well as somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEP) were recorded at baseline, 15, 30, 45 minutes, and at the end of surgery. In order to identify differences in the same patient after dexmedetomidine administration, we designed substudy 2 with 20 new patients randomized to two groups. After 30 minutes with TIVA, 10 patients received dexmedetomidine (0.5 mcg/kg/h) and 10 patients SS. The same variables were recorded.

RESULTS

In substudy 1, propofol requirements were significantly lower (P = .004) and tcMEP intensity at the end of surgery was significantly higher in PRD group, but no statistically significant differences were observed for remifentanil requirements, SSEP and tcMEP latency or amplitude. In substudy 2, no differences in any of the variables were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of dexmedetomidine at a dosage of 0.5 mg/kg/h may reduce propofol requirements and adversely affect some neuromonitoring variables. However, it can be an alternative on IONM during cranial surgeries. REDEX EudraCT: 2014-000962-23.

Effects of polarity of bipolar sensorimotor direct cortical stimulation on intraoperative motor evoked potentials

OBJECTIVE

The present study investigated the effects of the stimulus polarity and location of motor evoked potential (MEP) to establish a stimulation protocol.

METHODS

Nineteen patients who intraoperatively underwent MEP in bipolar direct cortical stimulation were enrolled in the present study. Somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP) of the contralateral median nerve stimulation were recorded to determine stimulation sites. MEP was performed under two settings in all patients: 1. Anodal bipolar stimulation: an anode on the precentral gyrus and a cathode on the postcentral gyrus, 2. Cathodal bipolar stimulation: a cathode on the precentral gyrus and an anode on the postcentral gyrus. MEP amplitudes and the coefficient of variation (CV) at a stimulation intensity of 25 mA and the thresholds of induced MEP were compared between the two settings.

RESULTS

An electrical stimulation at 25 mA induced a significantly higher amplitude in cathodal bipolar stimulation than in anodal bipolar stimulation. Cathodal bipolar stimulation also showed significantly lower thresholds than anodal stimulation. CV did not significantly differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

These results indicate that cathodal bipolar stimulation is superior to anodal bipolar stimulation for intraoperative MEP monitoring.

SIGNIFICANCE

MEP in cathodal bipolar cortical stimulation may be used in a safe and useful evaluation method of motor fiber damage that combines sensitivity and specificity.

Neurophysiologic Intraoperative Monitoring for Spine Surgery: A Practical Guide From Past to Present

Intraoperative neuromonitoring was introduced in the second half of the 20th century with the goal of preventing patient morbidity for patients undergoing complex operations of the central and peripheral nervous system. Since its early use for scoliosis surgery, the growth and utilization of IOM techniques expanded dramatically over the past 50 years to include spinal tumor resection and evaluation of cerebral ischemia. The importance of IOM has been broadly acknowledged, and in 1989, the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) released a statement that the use of SSEPs should be standard-of-care during spine surgery. In 2012, both the AAN and the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society (ACNS) recommended that: "Intraoperative monitoring (IOM) using SSEPs and transcranial MEPs be established as an effective means of predicting an increased risk of adverse outcomes, such as paraparesis, paraplegia, and quadriplegia, in spinal surgery." With a multimodal approach that combines SSEPs, MEPs, and sEMG with tEMG and D waves, as appropriate, sensitivity and specificity can be maximized for the diagnosis of reversible insults to the spinal cord, nerve roots, and peripheral nerves. As with most patient safety efforts in the operating room, IOM requires contributions from and communication between a number of different teams. This comprehensive review of neuromonitoring techniques for surgery on the central and peripheral nervous system will highlight the technical, surgical and anesthesia factors required to optimize outcomes. In addition, this review will discuss important trouble shooting measures to be considered when managing ION changes concerning for potential injury.

Neuroanesthesia Guidelines for Optimizing Transcranial Motor Evoked Potential Neuromonitoring During Deformity and Complex Spinal Surgery: A Delphi Consensus Study

STUDY DESIGN

Expert opinion-modified Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE

We used a modified Delphi approach to obtain consensus among leading spinal deformity surgeons and their neuroanesthesiology teams regarding optimal practices for obtaining reliable motor evoked potential (MEP) signals.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring of transcranial MEPs provides the best method for assessing spinal cord integrity during complex spinal surgeries. MEPs are affected by pharmacological and physiological parameters. It is the responsibility of the spine surgeon and neuroanesthesia team to understand how they can best maintain high-quality MEP signals throughout surgery. Nevertheless, varying approaches to neuroanesthesia are seen in clinical practice.

METHODS

We identified 19 international expert spinal deformity treatment teams. A modified Delphi process with two rounds of surveying was performed. Greater than 50% agreement on the final statements was considered "agreement"; >75% agreement was considered "consensus."

RESULTS

Anesthesia regimens and protocols were obtained from the expert centers. There was a large amount of variability among centers. Two rounds of consensus surveying were performed, and all centers participated in both rounds of surveying. Consensus was obtained for 12 of 15 statements, and majority agreement was obtained for two of the remaining statements. Total intravenous anesthesia was identified as the preferred method of maintenance, with few centers allowing for low mean alveolar concentration of inhaled anesthetic. Most centers advocated for <150 μg/kg/min of propofol with titration to the lowest dose that maintains appropriate anesthesia depth based on awareness monitoring. Use of adjuvant intravenous anesthetics, including ketamine, low-dose dexmedetomidine, and lidocaine, may help to reduce propofol requirements without negatively effecting MEP signals.

CONCLUSION

Spine surgeons and neuroanesthesia teams should be familiar with methods for optimizing MEPs during deformity and complex spinal cases. Although variability in practices exists, there is consensus among international spinal deformity treatment centers regarding best practices.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

5.

Introduction of intraoperative neuromonitoring does not necessarily improve overall long-term outcome in elective aneurysm clipping

OBJECTIVE

Intraoperative neuromonitoring (IOM), particularly of somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEPs) and motor-evoked potentials (MEPs), evolved as standard of care in a variety of neurosurgical procedures. Case series report a positive impact of IOM for elective microsurgical clipping of unruptured intracranial aneurysms (ECUIA), whereas systematic evaluation of its predictive value is lacking. Therefore, the authors analyzed the neurological outcome of patients undergoing ECUIA before and after IOM introduction to this procedure.

METHODS

The dates of inclusion in the study were 2007-2014. In this period, ECUIA procedures before (n = 136, NIOM-group; 2007-2010) and after introduction of IOM (n = 138, IOM-group; 2011-2014) were included. The cutoff value for SSEP/MEP abnormality was chosen as an amplitude reduction ≥ 50%. SSEP/MEP changes were correlated with neurological outcome. IOM-undetectable deficits (bulbar, vision, ataxia) were not included in risk stratification.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in sex distribution, follow-up period, subarachnoid hemorrhage risk factors, aneurysm diameter, complexity, and location. Age was higher in the IOM-group (57 vs 54 years, p = 0.012). In the IOM group, there were 18 new postoperative deficits (13.0%, 5.8% permanent), 9 hemisyndromes, 2 comas, 4 bulbar symptoms, and 3 visual deficits. In the NIOM group there were 18 new deficits (13.2%; 7.3% permanent, including 7 hemisyndromes). The groups did not significantly differ in the number or nature of postoperative deficits, nor in their recovery rate. In the IOM group, SSEPs and MEPs were available in 99% of cases. Significant changes were noted in 18 cases, 4 of which exhibited postoperative hemisyndrome, and 1 suffered from prolonged comatose state (5 true-positive cases). Twelve patients showed no new detectable deficits (false positives), however 2 of these cases showed asymptomatic infarction. Five patients with new hemisyndrome and 1 comatose patient did not show significant SSEP/MEP alterations (false negatives). Overall sensitivity of SSEP/MEP monitoring was 45.5%, specificity 89.8%, positive predictive value 27.8%, and negative predictive value 95.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

The assumed positive impact of introducing SSEP/MEP monitoring on overall neurological outcome in ECUIA did not reach significance. This study suggests that from a medicolegal point of view, IOM is not stringently required in all neurovascular procedures. However, future studies should carefully address high-risk patients with complex procedures who might benefit more clearly from IOM than others.

Multimodal Intraoperative Spinal Cord Monitoring during Spinal Deformity Surgery: Efficacy, Diagnostic Characteristics, and Algorithm Development

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to present the diagnostic characteristics of multimodal intraoperative monitoring (IOM) in spinal deformity surgery and to define and categorise the neuromonitoring events, as well as propose an algorithm of action.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We reviewed 1,155 consecutive patients (807 female, 348 male) who underwent deformity correction using standardised perioperative care, cortical/cervical somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs), and upper/lower limb transcranial electrical motor evoked potential (MEPs) by a single surgeon. The mean age at surgery was 13.8 years (range 10-23.3). We categorised IOM events as true, transient true, and false positive or negative. Diagnostic performance criteria were calculated.

RESULTS

The most common diagnosis was adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in 717 (62%) patients. We identified 3 true positive monitoring events occurring in 2 patients (0.17%), 8 transient true positive (0.69%), and 8 transient false positive events (0.69%). There were no false negative events and no patient had postoperative neurological complications. The multimodal IOM technique had a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 99.3%, positive predictive value of 55.6%, and negative predictive value of 100%. Sensitivity was 100% for MEPs and multimodal monitoring compared to 20% for cortical or cervical SSEPs. The frequency of true or transient true positive events was higher (p = 0.07) in Scheuermann's kyphosis (3/91 patients, 3.3%) compared to adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (6/717 patients, 0.84%).

CONCLUSION

Multimodal IOM is highly sensitive and specific for spinal cord injury. This technique is reliable for the assessment of the condition of the spinal cord during major deformity surgery. We propose an algorithm of intraoperative action to allow close cooperation between the surgical, anaesthetic, and neurophysiology teams and to prevent neurological deficits.

Spinal cord injury after thoracic endovascular aortic aneurysm repair

PURPOSE

Thoracic endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (TEVAR) has become a mainstay of therapy for aneurysms and other disorders of the thoracic aorta. The purpose of this narrative review article is to summarize the current literature on the risk factors for and pathophysiology of spinal cord injury (SCI) following TEVAR, and to discuss various intraoperative monitoring and treatment strategies.

SOURCE

The articles considered in this review were identified through PubMed using the following search terms: thoracic aortic aneurysm, TEVAR, paralysis+TEVAR, risk factors+TEVAR, spinal cord ischemia+TEVAR, neuromonitoring+thoracic aortic aneurysm, spinal drain, cerebrospinal fluid drainage, treatment of spinal cord ischemia.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Spinal cord injury continues to be a challenging complication after TEVAR. Its incidence after TEVAR is not significantly reduced when compared with open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Nevertheless, compared with open procedures, delayed paralysis/paresis is the predominant presentation of SCI after TEVAR. The pathophysiology of SCI is complex and not fully understood, though the evolving concept of the importance of the spinal cord's collateral blood supply network and its imbalance after TEVAR is emerging as a leading factor in the development of SCI. Cerebrospinal fluid drainage, optimal blood pressure management, and newer surgical techniques are important components of the most up-to-date strategies for spinal cord protection.

CONCLUSION

Further experimental and clinical research is needed to aid in the discovery of novel neuroprotective strategies for the protection and treatment of SCI following TEVAR.

Monitoring rate and predictability of intraoperative monitoring in patients with intradural extramedullary and epidural metastatic spinal tumors

STUDY DESIGN

Single-center retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the monitoring rate, sensitivity and specificity of intraoperative monitoring (IOM) during removal of intradural extramedullary (IDEM) or epidural metastatic spinal tumors. Also, to assess the efficacy of monitoring somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEP) when motor-evoked potentials (MEP) are not measurable.

SETTING

The Neuro-Oncology Clinic, National Cancer Center, Korea.

METHODS

Patients (n=101) with IDEM or epidural metastatic spinal tumors at the cord level underwent surgeries monitored with SSEP and/or MEP. The monitoring rate was defined as negative when MEP or SSEP could not be measured after reversal of the neuromuscular block under general anesthesia. Positive IOM changes included more than a 50% change in the MEP or SSEP amplitude and more than a 10% delay in SSEP latency.

RESULTS

MEP was measurable in 73% of patients. The MEP monitoring rate in patients with motor power grades of 3 or less was 39%, which was lower than that of SSEP (83%). The sensitivity, specificity and predictability of MEP for motor changes were 93, 90 and 91%, respectively. Conversely, the sensitivity, specificity and predictability of SSEP were 62, 97 and 89%, respectively. In patients in whom MEP was not measurable (n=24), SSEP was monitored with a predictability of 83%.

CONCLUSION

In cases of extramedullary spinal tumors, MEP shows a higher sensitivity than SSEP does. However, the monitoring rate of MEP in non-ambulatory patients was lower than that of SSEP. In those cases, SSEP can be useful to monitor for postoperative neurological deficits.

The Diagnostic Accuracy of Evoked Potential Monitoring Techniques During Intracranial Aneurysm Surgery for Predicting Postoperative Ischemic Damage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of various evoked potential monitoring techniques in predicting postoperative neurologic deficit in intracranial aneurysm surgery.

METHODS

A literature search of the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted for English language articles published between March 31, 1983 and March 31, 2016. Original studies that reported the use of evoked potential monitoring during intracranial aneurysm surgery in predicting postoperative neurologic damage were selected, and their relevant reference lists were hand searched. Test performance characteristics were summarized using hierarchic summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and bivariable random-effects models.

RESULTS

Thirteen qualifying studies (1597 patients; 1689 aneurysms) from 6 countries were identified. Eight studies investigated the use of the somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) monitoring technique, 5 investigated transcranial motor evoked potential (TcMEP) and another 5 investigated direct cortical motor evoked potential (DMEP). Bivariable pooled sensitivity and specificity were 48% (95% confidence interval [CI], 30.7-65.0) and 92% (CI, 88%-94.4%), respectively, for SSEP; 73% (CI, 21.0%-96.7%) and 94% (CI, 87.1%-97.5%) for TcMEP; and 97% (CI, 74.43%-99.99%) and 89% (CI, 84.0%-94.5%) for DMEP. ROC curve analysis showed that TcMEP had the highest accuracy (area under ROC curve 0.95; 95% CI, 0.93-0.97), followed by DMEP (0.91, 0.89-0.94) and SSEP (0.88, 0.85-0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

TcMEP and DMEP have higher diagnostic accuracy than SSEP in predicting postoperative neurologic deficit. The type of anesthetic agent, the use of neuromuscular blocking drugs, and the choice of diagnostic criteria for significant change in cerebral blood flow during aneurysm surgery affect the diagnostic accuracy of evoked potential techniques in predicting postoperative neurologic deficit.

Influence of general anaesthesia on the brainstem

The exact role of the brainstem in the control of body functions is not yet well known and the same applies to the influence of general anaesthesia on brainstem functions. Nevertheless in all general anaesthesia the anaesthesiologist should be aware of the interaction of anaesthetic drugs and brainstem function in relation to whole body homeostasis. As a result of this interaction there will be changes in consciousness, protective reflexes, breathing pattern, heart rate, temperature or arterial blood pressure to name a few. Brainstem function can be explored using three different approaches: clinically, analyzing changes in brain electric activity or using neuroimaging techniques. With the aim of providing the clinician anaesthesiologist with a global view of the interaction between the anaesthetic state and homeostatic changes related to brainstem function, the present review article addresses the influence of anaesthetic drug effects on brainstem function through clinical exploration of cranial nerves and reflexes, analysis of electric signals such as electroencephalographic changes and what it is known about brainstem through the use of imaging techniques, more specifically functional magnetic resonance imaging.

Analysis of facial motor evoked potentials for assessing a central mechanism in hemifacial spasm

OBJECTIVE Hemifacial spasm (HFS) is a cranial nerve hyperactivity disorder characterized by unique neurophysiological features, although the underlying pathophysiology remains disputed. In this study, the authors compared the effects of desflurane on facial motor evoked potentials (MEPs) from the spasm and nonspasm sides of patients who were undergoing microvascular decompression (MVD) surgery to test the hypothesis that HFS is associated with a central elevation of facial motor neuron excitability. METHODS Facial MEPs were elicited in 31 patients who were undergoing MVD for HFS and were administered total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with or without additional desflurane, an inhaled anesthetic known to centrally suppress MEPs. All measurements were completed before dural opening while a consistent mean arterial blood pressure was maintained and electroencephalography was performed. The activation threshold voltage and mean amplitudes of the MEPs from both sides of the face were compared. RESULTS There was a significantly lower mean activation threshold of facial MEPs on the spasm side than on the nonspasm side (mean ± SD 162.9 ± 10.1 vs 198.3 ± 10.1 V, respectively; p = 0.01). In addition, MEPs were also elicited more readily when single-pulse transcranial electrical stimulation was used on the spasm side (74% vs 31%, respectively; p = 0.03). Although desflurane (1 minimum alveolar concentration) suppressed facial MEPs on both sides, the suppressive effects of desflurane were less on the spasm side than on the nonspasm side (59% vs 79%, respectively; p = 0.03), and M waves recorded from the mentalis muscle remained unchanged, which indicates that desflurane did not affect the peripheral facial nerve or neuromuscular junction. CONCLUSIONS Centrally acting inhaled anesthetic agents can suppress facial MEPs and therefore might interfere with intraoperative monitoring. The elevated motor neuron excitability and differential effects of desflurane between the spasm and nonspasm sides support a mechanism of central pathophysiology in HFS. Clinical trial registration no.: B2012:099 ( clinicaltrials.gov ).

Impact of inhalation vs. intravenous anaesthesia on autonomic nerves and internal anal sphincter tone

BACKGROUND

Pelvic intraoperative neuromonitoring (pIONM) aims to identify and spare the autonomic nerves and maintain patients' quality of life. The effect of anaesthetic agents on the pIONM signal is unknown; therefore, the aim of the present study was to compare the influences of inhalation anaesthesia (IA) and total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA).

METHODS

Twenty rectal cancer patients undergoing open nerve-sparing total mesorectal excision (TME) were assigned to pIONM under either IA or TIVA (n = 10 per group). IA was maintained with sevoflurane and TIVA with propofol. During surgery, pelvic autonomic nerves were electrically stimulated under electromyography (EMG) of the internal anal sphincter (IAS). These triggered EMG signals were analysed.

RESULTS

The absolute EMG amplitude during pIONM increased to 1.20 μV (interquartile range (IQR): 0.94-1.6) for IA and 1.49 μV (IQR: 0.84-2.75) for TIVA (P = 0.002). The relative EMG amplitude increase also was significantly lower for IA (0.59; IQR: 0.30-0.81; TIVA: 0.99; IQR: 0.62-2.5), (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to compare the influences of IA and TIVA on the autonomic nervous system. While both anaesthetic regimens proved useful for pIONM, TIVA with propofol may provide better signal quality than IA with sevoflurane.

A comparison of the effects of desflurane versus propofol on transcranial motor-evoked potentials in pediatric patients

PURPOSE

The aim was to compare the effects of propofol and desflurane anesthesia on transcranial motor evoked potentials (MEPs) from pediatric patients undergoing surgery for spinal deformities.

METHODS

Desflurane and propofol cohorts (25 patients each) were obtained retrospectively and matched for patient characteristics and surgical approach. MEPs from the thenar eminence and abductor hallucis were compared during maintenance anesthesia on desflurane (0.6-0.8 MAC) or propofol infusion (150-300 μg/kg/min). MEP amplitudes and durations were obtained for successive 30-min intervals for 150 min, beginning 60 min after maintenance anesthesia.

RESULTS

Mean peak to peak amplitudes of MEPs under desflurane anesthesia from the thenar eminence (419 μV) and abductor hallucis (386 μv) were not significantly different from those under propofol (608 μV, 343 μV, thenar, and abductor hallucis, respectively). Stimulation was greater by 42 V and 136 mA, and trains were slightly longer in the desflurane compared to the propofol group (p < 0.05). Most MEP amplitudes for the desflurane and propofol cohorts remained the same or increased (71 % of cases) when those after 150 min were compared to those in the first 30-min interval.

CONCLUSIONS

MEPs with good amplitudes were obtained under desflurane only anesthesia that were comparable to propofol only anesthesia in pediatric patients during surgery for spinal deformities. There was no evidence for anesthetic fade over the time period examined. When used by itself, desflurane can be considered a viable alternative to propofol anesthesia.

Differential rates of false-positive findings in transcranial electric motor evoked potential monitoring when using inhalational anesthesia versus total intravenous anesthesia during spine surgeries

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

False-positive loss of transcranial electrical motor evoked potentials (TCe-MEPs) limits the efficacy of motor tract monitoring during spine surgery. Although total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) is widely regarded as the optimal regimen for TCe-MEPs, inhalational anesthesia is an alternative regimen.

PURPOSE

To compare the rates of false-positive TCe-MEPs during spine surgery for patients anesthetized with TIVA and inhalation anesthesia.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective analysis of data collected from consecutive patients undergoing TCe-MEP monitoring during spinal surgery.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Consecutive adult patients from multiple surgical centers undergoing spine surgery inclusive of cervical or thoracic spinal levels during 2008-2009 who received TIVA or inhalation anesthesia.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the rate of false-positive alerts using TCe-MEPS, defined as a persistent loss of 90% or greater of the amplitude of TCe-MEP in one or more muscles not attributed to technical or transient systemic factors (hypotension or hypoxia) and not associated with any postoperative neurologic deficit.

METHODS

Patients were divided into two groups according to anesthetic regimen: those anesthetized with one or more inhalational agents (n=1,303) and patients anesthetized with TIVA (n=511). The Fisher exact test and unpaired t test were used to compare group characteristics and false-positive rates. Each group was further subdivided by spinal region (cervical, thoracic, and thoracolumbar) and by presence of preoperative motor deficit. A Pearson chi-squared test was used to identify differences according to spinal region. This study was not supported by any financial sources nor do the authors have any financial relationships to disclose.

RESULTS

Patient with inhaled anesthesia showed significantly higher rates of false-positive TCe-MEP changes (15.0% vs. 3.2%) compared with the TIVA group. These differences were significant across all surgical subgroups. The inhaled group had a larger number of patients with preoperative motor deficits compared with TIVA (45.0% vs. 37.4%), a potential confounder for false-positive results. However, a significantly higher rate of false-positive TCe-MEP changes was still observed in the inhaled group (11.4% vs. 0.6% for TIVA) when analyzing only those patients without preoperative motor deficits.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of inhalation anesthesia during adult spinal surgery is associated with significantly higher rates of false-positive changes compared with TIVA during TCe-MEP monitoring. This relationship appears independent of preoperative motor status. Further study and multivariate analysis of anesthetic agents, diagnosis, and symptoms is necessary to elucidate the impact of these variables. The potential confounding effects of inhalational anesthesia on TCe-MEP monitoring should be considered when determining anesthetic regimen.

Intraoperative motor evoked potential monitoring - a position statement by the American Society of Neurophysiological Monitoring

The following intraoperative MEP recommendations can be made on the basis of current evidence and expert opinion: (1) Acquisition and interpretation should be done by qualified personnel. (2) The methods are sufficiently safe using appropriate precautions. (3) MEPs are an established practice option for cortical and subcortical mapping and for monitoring during surgeries risking motor injury in the brain, brainstem, spinal cord or facial nerve. (4) Intravenous anesthesia usually consisting of propofol and opioid is optimal for muscle MEPs. (5) Interpretation should consider limitations and confounding factors. (6) D-wave warning criteria consider amplitude reduction having no confounding factor explanation: >50% for intramedullary spinal cord tumor surgery, and >30-40% for peri-Rolandic surgery. (7) Muscle MEP warning criteria are tailored to the type of surgery and based on deterioration clearly exceeding variability with no confounding factor explanation. Disappearance is always a major criterion. Marked amplitude reduction, acute threshold elevation or morphology simplification could be additional minor or moderate spinal cord monitoring criteria depending on the type of surgery and the program's technique and experience. Major criteria for supratentorial, brainstem or facial nerve monitoring include >50% amplitude reduction when warranted by sufficient preceding response stability. Future advances could modify these recommendations.

Neurophysiologic intraoperative monitoring in children with Down syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Neurophysiological monitoring during complex spine procedures may reduce risk of injury by providing feedback to the operating surgeon. This tool is a well-established and important surgical adjunct in adults, but clinical data in children are not well described. Moreover, to the best of our knowledge, neurophysiologic intraoperative monitoring data have not been reported in children with neurodevelopmental disorders, such as Down syndrome, who commonly present with craniocervical instability requiring internal fixation. The purpose of this study is to determine the reliability and safety of neurophysiologic intraoperative monitoring in a group of children with Down syndrome undergoing neurosurgical spine procedures.

METHODS

A total of six consecutive spinal procedures in six children with Down syndrome (three boys and three girls; mean age 10 years, range 4-16 years) were analyzed between January 1, 2008 and June 31, 2011. Somatosensory evoked potentials were stimulated at the ulnar nerve and tibial nerve for upper and lower extremities, respectively, and recorded at Erb's point and the scalp. Motor evoked potentials were elicited by transcranial electrical stimulation and recorded at the extensor carpi ulnaris muscle and tibialis anterior muscle for upper and lower extremities, respectively. A standardized anesthesia protocol for monitoring consisted of a titrated propofol drip combined with bolus dosing of fentanyl or sufentanil.

RESULTS

Somatosensory and motor evoked potentials were documented at the beginning and end of the procedure in all six patients. Changes during the surgery were recorded. Five patients maintained somatosensory potentials throughout surgery. One patient demonstrated a >10% increase in latency or >50% decrease in amplitude suggesting spinal cord dysfunction. A mean baseline stimulation threshold for motor evoked potentials of 485 + 85 V (range 387-600 V) was used. Four patients maintained motor evoked potentials throughout surgery. One patient had loss of left lower somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) and motor evoked potentials (MEPs) after rod placement; upon removal of the rod, SSEPs returned but not MEPs. Another patient did not have consistent MEPs on one side and had absent MEPs on the contralateral side throughout the case. Loss of MEPs in these two patients did not correlate with postoperative neurological status. There were no complications directly related to neurophysiologic intraoperative monitoring technique.

CONCLUSIONS

Neurophysiologic intraoperative monitoring during neurosurgical procedures in children with Down syndrome may be reliably and safely implemented. Changes in neurophysiologic parameters during surgery must be carefully interpreted, and discussed with the neurosurgeon, neurophysiologist, and neuroanesthesiologist, and may not correlate with postoperative clinical changes. These changes may be related to abnormal physiology rather than an insult at the time of surgery. Nonetheless, the authors advocate routine neurophysiologic intraoperative monitoring in this special group of children undergoing neurosurgical spine procedures.

Non-neurologic complications following surgery for scoliosis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of non-neurologic complications following surgery for scoliosis and to identify factors that can increase this risk.

METHODS

The demographic data, medical and surgical histories, and prevalence of non-neurologic complications were reviewed in a retrospective cohort of 602 patients, who had undergone corrective surgery for scoliosis between January 2001 and June 2011.

RESULTS

There were 450 patients under 20 years old (U20) and 152 of patients above 20 years old (A20) enrolled in this study. Forty-nine patients in U20 (10.9%) and 18 patients in A20 (11.8%) had post-operative complications. Respiratory complications were most common in U20 (4%) and gastrointestinal complications were most common in A20 (7%). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in the prevalence of complications. Logistic regression revealed that factors that correlated with an increased odds for complications were Cobb angle (P = 0.001/P = 0.013, respectively), length of operation time (P = 0.003/P = 0.006, respectively), duration of anesthesia (P < 0.001/P = 0.005, respectively) and transfusion (P = 0.003/P = 0.015, respectively) in U20 and A20. Also, comorbidities (P = 0.021) in U20, and decreased body mass index (P = 0.030), pre-operative forced vital capacity (P = 0.001), forced expired volume in 1s (P = 0.001), increased numbers of vertebrae fused (P = 0.004), blood loss (P = 0.001) in A20 were associated with increased odds for complications.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in the prevalence of complication in scoliosis patients by age. The prevalence of complication was dependent on Cobb angle, length of operation time, duration of anesthesia and transfusion of PRBC. Deterioration of preoperative pulmonary function significantly increased risk of post-operative complications in adult patients.

Warning thresholds on the basis of origin of amplitude changes in transcranial electrical motor-evoked potential monitoring for cervical compression myelopathy

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from consecutive patients undergoing transcranial electrical motor-evoked potential (TCE-MEP: compound muscle action potentials) monitoring during cervical spine surgery. OBJECTIVE.: To divide the warning threshold of TCE-MEP amplitude changes on the basis of origin into the spinal tract and spinal segments and decide warning thresholds for each.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The parameter commonly used for the warning threshold in TCE-MEP monitoring is wave amplitude, but amplitude changes have not been examined by anatomical origin.

METHODS

Intraoperative TCE-MEP amplitude changes were reviewed for 357 patients with cervical myelopathy. Most of the patients were monitored by transcranial electrical stimulated spinal-evoked potential combined with TCE-MEP. The warning threshold of TCE-MEP was taken as waveform disappearance. For each patient, amplitude changes were separated, according to origin, into the spinal tract and spinal segments and compared with clinical outcome.

RESULTS

Assessable TCE-MEP waves were obtained in 350 cases. Disappearance of TCE-MEP waves, which were innervated by the spinal levels exposed to the surgical invasion, was seen in 11 cases. Disappearance of TCE-MEPs, which were innervated by the spinal levels inferior to them, was seen in 43 cases. There was no postoperative motor deficit in those cases. However, such deficits caused by spinal segment injury were seen in 2 cases, which showed that intraoperative amplitude decreased to 4.5% and 27%.

CONCLUSION

If we had established the warning threshold as 30% of the control amplitude, we would likely have prevented both cases of postoperative motor deficits, but 106 (30.3%) cases would have become positive cases. If we had established the warning threshold separately as wave disappearance for the spinal tract and 30% of the control amplitude for the spinal segments, sensitivity and specificity would have been 100% and 83.7%, respectively. Dividing the warning threshold on the basis of origin of amplitude changes could reduce false-positive cases and prevent intraoperative injuries.

[Intraoperative electrophysiological monitoring with evoked potentials]

During the last 30 years intraoperative electrophysiological monitoring (IOEM) has gained increasing importance in monitoring the function of neuronal structures and the intraoperative detection of impending new neurological deficits. The use of IOEM could reduce the incidence of postoperative neurological deficits after various surgical procedures. Motor evoked potentials (MEP) seem to be superior to other methods for many indications regarding monitoring of the central nervous system. During the application of IOEM general anesthesia should be provided by total intravenous anesthesia with propofol with an emphasis on a continuous high opioid dosage. When intraoperative MEP or electromyography guidance is planned, muscle relaxation must be either completely omitted or maintained in a titrated dose range in a steady state. The IOEM can be performed by surgeons, neurologists and neurophysiologists or increasingly more by anesthesiologists. However, to guarantee a safe application and interpretation, sufficient knowledge of the effects of the surgical procedure and pharmacological and physiological influences on the neurophysiological findings are indispensable.

Monitoring techniques for prevention of procedure-related ischemic damage in aneurysm surgery

OBJECTIVE

To describe the application of intraoperative monitoring techniques during aneurysm surgery and to discuss the advantages and limitations of these techniques in prevention of postoperative neurologic deficits.

METHODS

Articles found in the literature through PubMed for the time frame 1980-2011 and the authors' personal files were reviewed.

RESULTS

Various techniques for detection of vascular insufficiency are available, including direct methods to measure cerebral blood flow and indirect methods to evaluate the integrity of neurologic pathways.

CONCLUSIONS

The choice of monitoring modality should be governed by the vessel and by the vascular territory most at risk during the planned procedure with proper awareness of the potential limits related to each technique. Aneurysm surgery monitoring should help to address issues of continuity and provide a morphologic and functional assessment. Although the use of monitoring devices is still not routine in aneurysm surgery and no standards have been established, combining different monitoring techniques is crucial to optimize aneurysm surgery and avoid or minimize complications.

Improving successful rate of transcranial electrical motor-evoked potentials monitoring during spinal surgery in young children

INTRODUCTION

This prospective study was to investigate the successful rate of intraoperative motor evoked potentials (MEP) monitoring for children (<12 years old) with congenital scoliosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A consecutive series of 27 young children (7 girls and 20 boys; from 1 to 11 years old) between September 2007 and November 2009, were enrolled to this study. 12 patients received general anesthesia based on TIVA, induced with propofol 2-4 mg/kg and fentanyl 3-5 µg/kg followed by a continuous infusion of propofol (20-150 µg/kg/min, at mean of 71.7 µg/kg/min). The other 15 patients received combined inhalation and intravenous anesthesia, induced with sevoflurane and fentanyl 3-5 µg/kg and maintained by sevoflurane (0.5-1%). The maintenance of anaesthesia management was performed with stable physiological parameters during surgery.

RESULTS

Intraoperative MEP monitoring was successfully performed in all patients, while SEP was successfully performed in 26 of 27 patients. There was no significant difference of successful rates between SEP and MEP monitoring (P > 0.05). As well, no difference in MEP successful rates was observed in two groups with different anesthetic techniques. No wake-up test and no post-operative neurological deficits occurred in this series of patients.

CONCLUSION

Low dose anesthesia by either TIVA with propofol or sevoflurane-based mixture anesthesia protocol can help the intraoperative spinal cord monitoring to successfully elicit MEP and perform reliable monitoring for patients below 12 years of age.

The use of motor evoked potential monitoring during cerebral aneurysm surgery to predict pure motor deficits due to subcortical ischemia

Subcortical infarcts are most commonly the consequence of perforating artery occlusion and pure motor deficit is the most frequent syndrome resulting from an interruption of the corticospinal tract at the level of the corona radiate, the internal capsule or the brainstem. Motor evoked potential (MEP) monitoring is used as an adjunct to surgery as somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP) have been found to be insensitive to these lesions. Two different techniques have been used for monitoring MEPs during aneurysm surgery: transcranial electrical stimulation (TES) and direct cortical stimulation (DCS). TES may result in patient movement, interfering with microdissection. There is also concern that TES MEP may not detect subcortical motor pathway ischemia by stimulating deeper subcortical structures and may thereby bypass the ischemic area. DCS produces focal muscle activation, less movement and more superficial stimulation that should detect cortical and superficial subcortical ischemia, hence avoiding false-negatives. However, this technique also has disadvantages including subdural bleeding and injury to the brain. Using close-to-motor-threshold stimulation and focal stimulating electrode montages, TES and DCS MEPs do not vary significantly in their capacity to detect lesions of the motor cortex or its efferent pathways. Both techniques are prone to interference by anesthetic agents.

Intraoperative monitoring of motor evoked potentials in very young children

OBJECT

Neurophysiological monitoring of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) during complex spine procedures may reduce the risk of injury by providing feedback to the operating surgeon. While this tool is a well-established surgical adjunct in adults, clinical data in children are sparse. The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability and safety of MEP monitoring in a group of children younger than 3 years of age undergoing neurosurgical spine procedures.

METHODS

A total of 10 consecutive spinal procedures in 10 children younger than 3 years of age (range 5-31 months, mean 16.8 months) were analyzed between January 1, 2008, and May 1, 2010. Motor evoked potentials were elicited by transcranial electric stimulation. A standardized anesthesia protocol for monitoring consisted of a titrated propofol drip combined with bolus dosing of fentanyl or sufentanil.

RESULTS

Motor evoked potentials were documented at the beginning and end of the procedure in all 10 patients. A mean baseline stimulation threshold of 533 ± 124 V (range 321-746 V) was used. Six patients maintained MEP signals ≥ 50% of baseline amplitude throughout the surgery. There was a greater than 50% decrease in intraoperative MEP amplitude in at least 1 extremity in 4 patients. Two of these patients returned to baseline status by the end of the case. Two patients had a persistent decrement or variability in MEP signals at the end of the procedure; this correlated with postoperative weakness. There were no complications related to the technique of monitoring MEPs.

CONCLUSIONS

A transcranial electric stimulation protocol monitoring corticospinal motor pathways during neurosurgical procedures in children younger than 3 years of age was reliably and safely implemented. A persistent intraoperative decrease of greater than 50% in this small series of 10 pediatric patients younger than 3 years of age predicted a postoperative neurological deficit. The authors advocate routine monitoring of MEPs in this pediatric age group undergoing neurosurgical spine procedures.

The prevention of neural complications in the surgical treatment of scoliosis: the role of the neurophysiological intraoperative monitoring

Iatrogenic spinal cord injury is the most feared complication of scoliosis surgery. The importance of combined somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP) and motor evoked potentials (MEP) monitoring during spine surgery is well known. The current authors retrospectively evaluated the results of neurophysiological intraoperative monitoring (IOM) in a large population of patients who underwent surgical treatment for spinal deformity. Intraoperative monitoring of SEPs and transcranial electrical stimulation MEPs (TES-MEP) was performed in 172 successive patients who underwent surgical treatment of idiopathic (128 pts), congenital (15 pts) or syndromic (29 pts) scoliosis. The first 106 patients (Group 1) underwent only SEP monitoring, while the other 66 patients (Group 2) underwent combined SEP and TES-MEP monitoring, when the technique was introduced in the current authors' institution. Halogenate anaesthesia (Sevoflurane, MAC 0.6-1.2) was performed in Group 1 cases, total intravenous anaesthesia (Propofol infusion, 6-10 mg/kg/h) in Group 2 patients. A neurophysiological "alert" was defined as a reduction in amplitude (unilateral or bilateral) of at least 50% for SEPs and of 65% for TES-MEPs compared with baseline. In Group 1, two patients (1.9%) developed postoperative neurologic deficits following surgical correction of spinal deformity, consisting of permanent paraparesis in one case and transient paraparesis secondary to spinal cord ischaemia in the other. Twelve patients presented intraoperative significant changes of neurophysiological parameters that improved following corrective actions by surgeons and anaesthesiologists, and did not show any postoperative neurologic deficits. In ten cases the alert was apparently unrelated to surgical manoeuvres or to pharmacological interventions and no postoperative neurologic deficits were noted. Considering the patients of Group 2, two patients (3.0%) presented transient postoperative neurologic deficits preceded by significant intraoperative changes in SEPs and TES-MEPs. In five cases a transient reduction in the amplitudes of SEPs (1 patient) and/or TES-MEPs (5 patients) was recorded intraoperatively with no postoperative neurologic deficits. In conclusion, in the current series of 172 patients the overall prevalence of postoperative neurologic deficit was 2.3% (4 patients). When combined SEP and TES-MEP monitoring was performed, the sensitivity and specificity of IOM for sensory-motor impairment was 100 and 98%, respectively. Combined SEP and TES-MEP monitoring must be regarded as the neurophysiological standard for intraoperative detection of emerging spinal cord injury during corrective spinal deformity surgery. Early detection affords the surgical team an opportunity to perform rapid intervention to prevent injury progression or possibly to reverse impending neurologic sequelae.

Highlights of anesthetic considerations for intraoperative neuromonitoring

Though relatively new, intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) has become standard of care for many neurosurgical procedures. The use of IONM has substantially decreased the rate of paralysis after deformity surgery, and has been validated in cervical spine surgery, and thoracic and lumbar laminectomy (1) (2), (3). The main modalities are: somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs), motor evoked potentials (MEPs), and electromyography (EMGs). Each test examines a functionally separate area of the spinal cord, which test is chosen depends on the location of the surgery and the patient's preexisting injuries and deficits (6). Inhaled anesthetics decrease the waveform amplitude and increase latency, intravenous anesthetics have the same effect but to a lesser degree. Best anesthetic regimen for surgery involving intraoperative monitoring is controversial. Both inhaled and intravenous agents depress signal attainment, however for equal MAC concentrations inhaled agents cause more depression(11). While studies have shown that halogenated agents and nitrous oxide do in fact depress MEP signals more than total intravenous anesthesia, less is known on the relationship between IONM and patient characteristics. Lo's study documenting MEP attainment with 0.5 MAC was done in an otherwise healthy scoliosis population (12), and no study to date has analyzed signal attainment in correlation with patient characteristics and anesthetic technique. While it is clear that anesthetic technique is extremely important, certain patient characteristics appear to be more common in difficult to monitor patients. The identification of these characteristics would suggest to the anesthesiologist the need for a more stringent technique (TIVA) and avert surgical delay or cancellation due to inability to obtain baseline or worse- loss of intraoperative waveform and need for a Stagnara wake-up test. Our group at Mt. Sinai has retrospectively studied patient characteristics, anesthetic technique and attainment of neuromonitoring signals. Hypertension and diabetes are independent predictors of monitoring failure, and these are preferentially sensitive to inhalational agents. Age and weight are also predictors, but less significant. In summary, neurophysiologic monitoring has evolved to be a consistent part of many procedures. The anesthesiologist should strive to understand the rationale behind monitoring and the basis of its utility. IONM has many implications for anesthetic technique and need for control of the physiologic milieu. With this knowledge the anesthesiologist can work together with the neuromonitoring team and surgeon to ensure patient safety during and after surgery.

Somatosensory Evoked Potentials suppression due to remifentanil during spinal operations; a prospective clinical study

BACKGROUND

Somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP) are being used for the investigation and monitoring of the integrity of neural pathways during surgical procedures. Intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring is affected by the type of anesthetic agents. Remifentanil is supposed to produce minimal or no changes in SSEP amplitude and latency. This study aims to investigate whether high doses of remifentanil influence the SSEP during spinal surgery under total intravenous anesthesia.

METHODS

Ten patients underwent spinal surgery. Anesthesia was induced with propofol (2 mg/Kg), fentanyl (2 mcg/Kg) and a single dose of cis-atracurium (0.15 mg/Kg), followed by infusion of 0.8 mcg/kg/min of remifentanil and propofol (30-50 mcg/kg/min). The depth of anesthesia was monitored by Bispectral Index (BIS) and an adequate level (40-50) of anesthesia was maintained. Somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) were recorded intraoperatively from the tibial nerve (P37) 15 min before initiation of remifentanil infusion. Data were analysed over that period.

RESULTS

Remifentanil induced prolongation of the tibial SSEP latency which however was not significant (p > 0.05). The suppression of the amplitude was significant (p < 0.001), varying from 20-80% with this decrease being time related.

CONCLUSION

Remifentanil in high doses induces significant changes in SSEP components that should be taken under consideration during intraoperative neuromonitoring.

Anesthetic experience performing intraoperative monitoring of motor evoked potentials during scoliosis surgery in adolescent patients: report on 7 cases: Seven cases report

Intraoperative monitoring of motor evoked potential (MEP) is a modality for preventing spinal cord injury during spinal surgery. However, inhalation anesthetics and muscle relaxants depressing MEP responses, must be restricted for monitoring MEP. Therefore, anesthetic management needs careful attention for preventing recall and unintentional movements during surgery and special techniques for monitoring adequate MEP. We report here on 7 cases of successful intraoperative monitoring of MEP with total intravenous anesthesia using propofol and remifentanil for scoliosis surgery in adolescent patients.

Impact of anesthesia on transcranial electric motor evoked potential monitoring during spine surgery: a review of the literature

Object

Transcranial motor evoked potential (TcMEP) monitoring is frequently used in complex spinal surgeries to prevent neurological injury. Anesthesia, however, can significantly affect the reliability of TcMEP monitoring. Understanding the impact of various anesthetic agents on neurophysiological monitoring is therefore essential.

Methods

A literature search of the National Library of Medicine database was conducted to identify articles pertaining to anesthesia and TcMEP monitoring during spine surgery. Twenty studies were selected and reviewed.

Results

Inhalational anesthetics and neuromuscular blockade have been shown to limit the ability of TcMEP monitoring to detect significant changes. Hypothermia can also negatively affect monitoring. Opioids, however, have little influence on TcMEPs. Total intravenous anesthesia regimens can minimize the need for inhalational anesthetics.

Conclusions

In general, selecting the appropriate anesthetic regimen with maintenance of a stable concentration of inhalational or intravenous anesthetics optimizes TcMEP monitoring.