Depression of I Waves in Corticospinal Volleys by Sevoflurane, Thiopental, and Propofol

Circuits in the motor cortex explain oscillatory responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a popular method used to investigate brain function. Stimulation over the motor cortex evokes muscle contractions known as motor evoked potentials (MEPs) and also high-frequency volleys of electrical activity measured in the cervical spinal cord. The physiological mechanisms of these experimentally derived responses remain unclear, but it is thought that the connections between circuits of excitatory and inhibitory neurons play a vital role. Using a spiking neural network model of the motor cortex, we explained the generation of waves of activity, so called 'I-waves', following cortical stimulation. The model reproduces a number of experimentally known responses including direction of TMS, increased inhibition, and changes in strength. Using populations of thousands of neurons in a model of cortical circuitry we showed that the cortex generated transient oscillatory responses without any tuning, and that neuron parameters such as refractory period and delays influenced the pattern and timing of those oscillations. By comparing our network with simpler, previously proposed circuits, we explored the contributions of specific connections and found that recurrent inhibitory connections are vital in producing later waves that significantly impact the production of motor evoked potentials in downstream muscles (Thickbroom, 2011). This model builds on previous work to increase our understanding of how complex circuitry of the cortex is involved in the generation of I-waves.

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.

I-waves in motor cortex revisited

I-waves represent high-frequency (~ 600 Hz) repetitive discharge of corticospinal fibers elicited by single-pulse stimulation of motor cortex. First detected and examined in animal preparations, this multiple discharge can also be recorded in humans from the corticospinal tract with epidural spinal electrodes. The exact underpinning neurophysiology of I-waves is still unclear, but there is converging evidence that they originate at the cortical level through synaptic input from specific excitatory interneuronal circuitries onto corticomotoneuronal cells, controlled by GABAAergic interneurons. In contrast, there is at present no supportive evidence for the alternative hypothesis that I-waves are generated by high-frequency oscillations of the membrane potential of corticomotoneuronal cells upon initial strong depolarization. Understanding I-wave physiology is essential for understanding how TMS activates the motor cortex.

Systematic re-evaluation of intraoperative motor-evoked potential suppression in scoliosis surgery

Background

Motor- (MEP) and somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEP) are susceptible to the effects of intraoperative environmental factors.

Methods

Over a 5-year period, 250 patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) who underwent corrective surgery with IOM were retrospectively analyzed for MEP suppression (MEPS).

Results

Our results show that four distinct groups of MEPS were encountered over the study period. All 12 patients did not sustain any neurological deficits postoperatively. However, comparison of groups 1 and 2 suggests that neither the duration of anesthesia nor speed of surgical or anesthetic intervention were associated with recovery to a level beyond the criteria for MEPS. For group 3, spontaneous MEPS recovery despite the lack of surgical intervention suggests that anesthetic intervention may play a role in this process. However, spontaneous MEPS recovery was also seen in group 4, suggesting that in certain circumstances, both surgical and anesthetic intervention was not required. In addition, neither the duration of time to the first surgical manoeuver nor the duration of surgical manoeuver to MEPS were related to recovery of MEPS. None of the patients had suppression of SSEPs intraoperatively.

Conclusion

This study suggests that in susceptible individuals, MEPS may rarely occur unpredictably, independent of surgical or anesthetic intervention. However, our findings favor anesthetic before surgical intervention as a proposed protocol. Early recognition of MEPS is important to prevent false positives in the course of IOM for spinal surgery.

Role of Facial Nerve Motor-Evoked Potential Ratio in Predicting Facial Nerve Function in Vestibular Schwannoma Surgery Both Immediate and at 1 Year

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether transcranial electrical stimulation-induced facial motor-evoked potential (FMEP) monitoring of the facial nerve (FN) during vestibular schwannoma (VS) tumor resection can predict both immediate and 1 year postoperative FN functional outcome.

DESIGN

Prospective consecutive non-comparative observational case series.

SETTING

Tertiary referral center.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Facial function, immediate post operation and at 1 year using House-Brackmann (HB) grading scale.

METHODS

The study included 367 consecutive patients (men 178; women 189; age 13-81 years) monitored during primary sporadic VS microsurgery between November 2002 and April 2015. Neurofibromatosis type II, revision surgery, previous radiotherapy treatment, preoperative facial nerve weakness, and non-VS cases were excluded retrospectively during analysis of data. Data of facial function were missing from eight patients at 1 year and were excluded. The correlation between the final-to-baseline FMEP ratio and immediate and 1 year facial nerve function was examined.

RESULTS

Using logistic regression model, the cut-off points of FMEP ratio were 0.62 (PPV 0.96) and 0.59 (PPV 0.98) which predicted satisfactory FN function (HB grades 1 or 2) immediately postoperative and at 1 year after surgery, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Transcranial electrical stimulation FMEP is a valuable tool for monitoring facial nerve function during resection of vestibular schwannoma. Maintaining a FMEP event-to-baseline ratio of 60% or greater is predictive of satisfactory long-term FN function.

TMS and drugs revisited 2014

The combination of pharmacology and transcranial magnetic stimulation to study the effects of drugs on TMS-evoked EMG responses (pharmaco-TMS-EMG) has considerably improved our understanding of the effects of TMS on the human brain. Ten years have elapsed since an influential review on this topic has been published in this journal (Ziemann, 2004). Since then, several major developments have taken place: TMS has been combined with EEG to measure TMS evoked responses directly from brain activity rather than by motor evoked potentials in a muscle, and pharmacological characterization of the TMS-evoked EEG potentials, although still in its infancy, has started (pharmaco-TMS-EEG). Furthermore, the knowledge from pharmaco-TMS-EMG that has been primarily obtained in healthy subjects is now applied to clinical settings, for instance, to monitor or even predict clinical drug responses in neurological or psychiatric patients. Finally, pharmaco-TMS-EMG has been applied to understand the effects of CNS active drugs on non-invasive brain stimulation induced long-term potentiation-like and long-term depression-like plasticity. This is a new field that may help to develop rationales of pharmacological treatment for enhancement of recovery and re-learning after CNS lesions. This up-dated review will highlight important knowledge and recent advances in the contribution of pharmaco-TMS-EMG and pharmaco-TMS-EEG to our understanding of normal and dysfunctional excitability, connectivity and plasticity of the human brain.

Propofol decreases the axonal excitability in rat primary sensory afferents

AIMS

The aim of this present study was to investigate the changes of peripheral sensory nerve excitability produced by propofol.

MAIN METHODS

In a recently described in vitro model of rodent saphenous nerve we used the technique of threshold tracking (QTRAC®) to measure changes of axonal nerve excitability of Aβ-fibres caused by propofol. Concentrations of 10 μMol, 100 μMol and 1000 μMol were tested. Latency, peak response, strength-duration time constant (τSD) and recovery cycle of the sensory neuronal action potential (SNAP) were recorded.

KEY FINDINGS

Our results have shown that propofol decreases nerve excitability of rat primary sensory afferents in vitro. Latency increased with increasing concentrations (0μMol: 0.96 ± 0.07ms; 1000μMol 1.10 ± 0.06ms, P<0.01). Also, propofol prolonged the relative refractory period (0μMol: 1.79 ± 1.13ms; 100 μMol: 2.53 ± 1.38ms, P<0.01), and reduced superexcitability (0 μMol: -14.0±4.0%; 100μMol: -9.5 ± 5.5%) and subexcitability (0μMol: 7.5 ± 1.2%; 1000μMol: 3.6 ± 1.2) significantly during the recovery cycle (P<0.01).

SIGNIFICANCE

Our results have shown that propofol decreases nerve excitability of primary sensory afferents. The technique of threshold tracking revealed that axonal voltage-gated ion channels are significantly affected by propofol and therefore might be at least partially responsible for earlier described analgesic effects.

Comparison between Sevoflurane/Remifentanil and Propofol/Remifentanil Anaesthesia in Providing Conditions for Somatosensory Evoked Potential Monitoring during Scoliosis Corrective Surgery

Somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) monitoring is an important tool in spinal corrective surgery. Anaesthesia has a significant influence on SSEP monitoring and a technique which has the least and shortest suppressant effect on SSEP while facilitating a fast recovery from anaesthesia is ideal. We compared the effect of sevoflurane/remifentanil and propofol/remifentanil anaesthesia on SSEPs during scoliosis corrective surgery and assessed patients’ clinical recovery profiles.

Twenty patients with idiopathic scoliosis receiving surgical correction with intraoperative SSEP monitoring were prospectively randomised to receive sevoflurane/remifentanil anaesthesia or propofol/remifentanil anaesthesia. During surgery, changes in anaesthesia dose and physiological variables were recorded, while SSEP was continuously monitored. A simulated ‘wake-up’ test was performed postoperatively to assess speed and quality of recovery from anaesthesia.

The effects of propofol and sevoflurane resulted in SSEP amplitude variability between 18.0% ± 3.5% to 28.7% ± 5.9% and SSEP latency variability within 1.3% ± 0.4% to 2.6% ± 1.2%. Patients receiving sevoflurane had faster suppression and faster recovery of SSEP amplitude compared to propofol (P <0.05), although propofol anaesthesia showed less within-patient variability in Cz amplitude and latency (P <0.05). On cessation of anaesthesia, time to eye-opening (5.2 vs. 16.5 minutes) and toe movement (5.4 vs. 17.4 minutes) was shorter following sevoflurane (all P <0.05).

These findings indicate that propofol produces a better SSEP signal than sevoflurane. However, adjustments in sevoflurane concentration result in faster changes in the SSEP signal than propofol. Assessment of neurological function was facilitated more rapidly after sevoflurane anaesthesia.

The Effects of Stimulation Pattern and Sevoflurane Concentration on Intraoperative Motor-Evoked Potentials

The usefulness of intraoperative monitoring of motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) during inhaled anesthesia is limited by the suppressive effects of volatile anesthetics on MEP signals. We investigated the effects of different stimulation patterns and end-tidal concentrations of sevoflurane on intraoperative transcranial electrical MEPs. In 12 patients undergoing craniotomy, stimulation patterns (300-500 V, 100-1000 Hz, 1-5 stimuli) and multiples (0.5, 0.75, and 1.0) of minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) of sevoflurane were varied randomly while remifentanil was administered at a constant rate of 0.2 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1). MEPs were recorded from thenar and hypothenar muscles and analyzed without knowledge of the respective MAC. Three-way analysis of variance revealed significant main effects for increasing stimulation intensity, frequency, and number of stimuli on MEP amplitude (P < 0.05). Maximum MEP amplitudes and recording success rates were observed during 4 stimuli delivered at 1000 Hz and 300 V. A significant main effect of sevoflurane concentration (0.5 versus 0.75 and 1 MAC multiple) on MEP amplitude was observed at the thenar recording site only (P < 0.05). In conclusion, MEP characteristics varied significantly with changes in stimulation pattern and less so with changes in sevoflurane concentration. The results suggest that high frequency repetitive stimulation allows intraoperative use of MEP monitoring during up to 1 MAC multiple of sevoflurane and constant infusion of remifentanil up to 0.2 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1).

Transcranial electrical stimulation as predictor of elicitation of intraoperative muscle-evoked potentials

STUDY DESIGN

Preoperative electrophysiological and neurologic findings from patients with cervical myelopathy were evaluated statistically to determine their predictive value relative to the success of eliciting intraoperative motor-evoked potentials.

OBJECTIVES

To determine which preoperative variables accurately predicted the success of eliciting an intraoperative muscle-evoked potential.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Motor-evoked potential recorded from the muscles after transcranial electrical stimulation is one of the most widely used methods for intraoperative spinal cord monitoring. However, motor-evoked potentials recorded from lower limb muscles are not detectable in patients with severe cervical myelopathy. Therefore, it is helpful to know the probability of the intraoperative transcranial electrical stimulation-motor evoked potential elicitation before the operation.

METHODS

There were 38 patients with cervical myelopathy. Before the operation, motor-evoked potentials following transcranial magnetic stimulation were recorded from the flexor hallucis brevis, and central motor conduction times were measured. Neurologic function was evaluated using the Japanese Orthopedic Association score. During the operation, transcranial electrical stimulation-motor evoked potential from the flexor hallucis brevis was recorded. The Japanese Orthopedic Association score, threshold intensity of magnetic stimulation, and central motor conduction times were statistically evaluated for their potential of being predictors.

RESULTS

The intraoperative transcranial electrical stimulation-motor evoked potential was detectable in all cases in which the preoperative transcranial magnetic stimulation-motor evoked potential was elicited by a lower intensity than 50% of the maximum output of the stimulator. Therefore, simultaneous use of other methods of monitoring should be considered in such cases that need higher output. However, the Japanese Orthopedic Association score or central motor conduction times were not useful criteria. CONCLUSIONS.: The threshold intensity of the preoperative transcranial magnetic stimulation-motor evoked potential was helpful in predicting elicitation of the intraoperative transcranial electrical stimulation-motor evoked potential.

TMS and drugs

The application of a single dose of a CNS active drug with a well-defined mode of action on a neurotransmitter or neuromodulator system may be used for testing pharmaco-physiological properties of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) measures of cortical excitability. Conversely, a physiologically well-defined single TMS measure of cortical excitability may be used as a biological marker of acute drug effects at the systems level of the cerebral cortex. An array of defined TMS measures may be used to study the pattern of effects of a drug with unknown or multiple modes of action. Acute drug effects may be rather different from chronic drug effects. These differences can also be studied by TMS measures. Finally, TMS or repetitive TMS by themselves may induce changes in endogenous neurotransmitters or neuromodulators. All these possible interactions are the focus of this in-depth review on TMS and drugs.

Effects of Anesthetic Agents and Physiologic Changes on Intraoperative Motor Evoked Potentials

Motor evoked potentials (MEPs) have shown promise as a valuable tool for monitoring intraoperative motor tract function and reducing postoperative plegia. MEP monitoring has been reported to contribute to deficit prevention during resection of tumors adjacent to motor structures in the cerebral cortex and spine, and in detecting spinal ischemia during thoracic aortic reconstruction. Many commonly used anesthetic agents have long been known to depress MEP responses and reduce MEP specificity for motor injury detection. Although new stimulation techniques have broadened the spectrum of anesthetics that can be used during MEP monitoring, certain agents continue to have dose-dependent effects on MEP reliability. Understanding the effects of anesthetic agents and physiologic alterations on MEPs is imperative to increasing the acceptance and application of this technique in the prevention of intraoperative motor tract injury. This review is intended as an overview of the effects of anesthetics and physiology on the reproducibility of intraoperative myogenic MEP responses, rather than an analysis of the sensitivity and specificity of this monitoring method in the prevention of motor injury.

Influence of propofol concentrations on multipulse transcranial motor evoked potentials

BACKGROUND

Motor evoked potentials can be affected by propofol anaesthesia. We studied how increasing target concentrations of propofol altered transcranial motor evoked potentials (tcMEP) during scoliosis surgery.

METHODS

Fifteen patients undergoing surgery for scoliosis were anaesthetized with remifentanil and propofol without nitrous oxide or neuromuscular blocking agents (BIS<60). tcMEP were elicited by transcranial electric multipulse stimulation of the motor cortex and recording of compound action potentials from the anterior tibialis muscle. tcMEP were obtained before surgery with propofol target values set from 4 to 8 mg litre(-1), and then during surgery. Arterial propofol concentrations were measured for each tcMEP recording.

RESULTS

Before surgery, increasing propofol reduced tcMEP amplitude in a dose-dependent manner, with no effect on latency. During surgery, at equivalent propofol concentrations, tcMEP were not statistically different from those obtained before surgery. In all except one patient, tcMEP signals were present during the entire procedure. In this patient the loss of tcMEP was unfortunately related to an anterior spinal cord lesion, which was confirmed by a wake-up test.

CONCLUSION

We found that, although propofol had a dose-dependent effect on tcMEP amplitude, anaesthesia could be maintained with remifentanil and propofol to allow recording and interpretation of tcMEP signals.

Current practice of motor evoked potential monitoring: results of a survey

Centers responding to a survey of MEP monitoring practices predominantly used transcranial electrical brain stimulation (TCES) with brief pulse trains and/or spinal cord stimulation (SCS) to elicit MEPs; transcranial magnetic stimulation and single-pulse TCES were not techniques of choice. Most centers using TCES had patient exclusion criteria (e.g., cochlear implants, cardiac pacemakers, prior craniotomy or skull fracture, history of seizures). Adverse effects included rare tongue injuries or seizures from TCES, and minor bleeding from needle electrodes in muscle. Spinal cord, peripheral nerve, and muscle recording sites were all employed. TCES with recording of muscle responses was the preferred MEP monitoring technique at the plurality of the centers. MEPs suitable for monitoring were obtained in about 91.6% of patients overall. Most of the failures were attributed to technical factors; preexisting neurologic dysfunction precluded MEP monitoring in approximately 1.7% of patients. Almost all centers monitored SEPs concurrently with MEPs. Overall, both measures remained stable during about 90.2% of cases. Adverse MEP changes occurred in about 8.3%; a little over half of these were accompanied by SEP changes. Adverse SEP changes without MEP changes occurred in about 1.5% of cases. SEPs and MEPs should be used together to optimally monitor the spinal cord.

Comparison of the effects of sevoflurane and propofol on cortical somatosensory evoked potentials

BACKGROUND

Propofol (P) and sevoflurane (S) are potential anaesthetic agents if electrophysiological monitoring is required during spinal surgery. They allow rapid recovery and do not depress cortical somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP) as much as other agents. The effects of these agents on SSEP have not been compared before.

METHODS

Twenty-four patients were allocated randomly to receive either S (n = 12) or P (n = 12). SSEP evoked by electrical stimulation of the posterior tibial nerve at the ankle were recorded before anaesthesia. The cortical potential P40 was recorded (latency P40 and amplitudes N29P40 and P40N50). The anaesthetic concentration was adjusted gradually to obtain three predetermined ranges of values of bispectral index (BIS): 45-55, 35-45 and 25-35. For each range, a stable state was maintained for 10 min and SSEP were recorded.

RESULTS

For the BIS 45-55 range, compared with preoperative values, P40 latency increased during S [mean change +2 (SD 0.6) ms] but not during P [+0.4 (0.2) ms (P = 0.12)] and both amplitudes (N29P40 and P40N50) decreased with S. Increasing S concentration caused a dose-dependent depression of SSEP. P did not have a statistically significant effect on the recordings and the signals remained stable in each BIS range.

CONCLUSION

Sevoflurane affected SSEP recordings in a dose-dependent fashion. Propofol had a minimal effect on SSEP recordings.

Corticospinal volleys and compound muscle action potentials produced by repetitive transcranial stimulation during spinal surgery

OBJECTIVES

To report our experience with neurophysiological monitoring of corticospinal function using compound muscle action potentials (CMAPs) produced by repetitive transcranial electrical stimulation in a large series of patients, after defining optimal stimulus parameters in a small group of patients.

METHODS

In 100 patients undergoing spinal surgery, corticospinal volleys were recorded using epidural electrodes, or CMAPs were recorded from innervated muscles, or both techniques were used to monitor spinal cord function. In subsets of patients, stimulus parameters were varied to determine the optimal parameters for CMAP recordings, using the corticospinal volleys to guide the initial choice.

RESULTS

Recordings of corticospinal volleys indicated that less energy was delivered to the cortex if the duration of each stimulus in the stimulus train was brief (e.g. 50 micros) and that there was attenuation of D and I waves in the corticospinal volley when the interstimulus interval in the train was <5 ms. An interstimulus interval of 5 ms proved significantly more effective than an interstimulus interval of 2 ms in evoking CMAPs, but resulted in a more complex, dispersed electromyographic (EMG) potential. The superiority of the 5 ms interval did not depend on stimulus intensity or the existence of pre-existing neurological deficit. Using trains of 5 pulses of duration 50 micros, interstimulus interval 5 ms and intensity 500 V, satisfactory CMAPs could be recorded in 55 of 82 patients, significantly less often in neurologically impaired patients than in neurologically normal subjects. Epidural recordings of the corticospinal volley were obtained in 61 of 69 patients, again more often in neurologically normal subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

When epidural recordings can be made, direct recordings of corticospinal activity are probably more reliable than recordings of CMAPs. However, epidural recordings are not suitable under all circumstances, and the ability to record CMAPs reliably represents an advance in intraoperative monitoring. Under the anaesthetic conditions used in the present study, the optimal stimulus parameters consist of a train of 5 stimuli of 50 micros duration at an interstimulus interval of 5 ms and an intensity of 500 V.