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

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.

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.

Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during scoliosis surgery in patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy.

PURPOSE: Little is known about the reliability and value of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) in patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) undergoing scoliosis correction surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of IONM and the cortical excitability in these patients. METHODS: Fifteen patients with DMD and scoliosis and 15 patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) underwent scoliosis correction surgery with the use of IONM. IONM consisted of transcranial electrical stimulation motor evoked potential (Tc-MEP) and somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) monitoring. The highest Tc-MEP amplitudes were collected to test the feasibility. Preoperative compound muscle action potentials (CMAPs) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS)-MEPs were recorded to test the cortical excitability. SSEPs were scored as elicitable or not elicitable. RESULTS: Tc-MEP amplitudes were significantly lower in the DMD group for both the gastrocnemius and tibialis anterior muscles. However, the abductor hallucis muscle had similar amplitudes in both the DMD as the AIS group. TMS/CMAP and Tc-MEP/CMAP ratios were similar in the DMD and AIS group (P = 0.126 and P = 0.792 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Tc-MEP and SSEP monitoring is feasible, particularly when Tc-MEPs are recorded from the abductor hallucis muscle in patients with DMD. Similar TMS/CMAP and Tc-MEP/CMAP ratios show that there were no differences observed in cortical excitability between the groups. IONM seems a feasible and valuable neurophysiological tool to signal possible surgically induced damage to the spinal cord during scoliosis correction surgery in patients with DMD.

Long-term evaluation of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring-assisted tethered cord surgery.

PURPOSE: Patients with tethered spinal cord have been investigated for short-term effects after tethered spinal cord surgery in the past. However, little is known about the long-term effects in this patient group. In this retrospective, longitudinal, observational study, a patient sample of a previous report of 65 patients was reassessed to observe the long-term effects of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring-assisted tethered cord surgery. METHODS: With the use of patient charts and a survey, patients were scored on four domains: (1) neurological deficits, (2) urological deficits, (3) pain symptoms, and (4) orthopedic deficits. Measurements were performed at four moments in time: (1) preoperatively, (2) postoperatively, (3) follow-up 1 (4.6 years), and (4) follow-up 2 (11.2 years). Besides this, a subgroup analysis and a quality of life questionnaire were performed. RESULTS: When observing the symptom domains in the long-term, the pain domain appeared to improve most postoperatively after which it remained stable over time. The neurological and urological domains showed a stable, slightly decreasing trend in the long-term follow-up. The orthopedic domain showed a significant increase of the number of patients with scoliosis during the long-term follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Lasting effects of stability in the neurological, urological, and pain domains were observed. Close monitoring during follow-up might contribute to early recognition of progressive scoliosis, in spite of detethering, in a risk group defined by females who underwent tethered cord surgery at or under the age of 12 years old with either lipomyelomeningocele, split cord malformation, or myelomeningocele. Detethering does not appear to protect these patients against progressive scoliosis.