Practice guidelines for the supervising professional: intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring.

The American Society of Neurophysiological Monitoring (ASNM) was founded in 1989 as the American Society of Evoked Potential Monitoring. From the beginning, the Society has been made up of physicians, doctoral degree holders, Technologists, and all those interested in furthering the profession. The Society changed its name to the ASNM and held its first Annual Meeting in 1990. It remains the largest worldwide organization dedicated solely to the scientifically-based advancement of intraoperative neurophysiology. The primary goal of the ASNM is to assure the quality of patient care during procedures monitoring the nervous system. This goal is accomplished primarily through programs in education, advocacy of basic and clinical research, and publication of guidelines, among other endeavors. The ASNM is committed to the development of medically sound and clinically relevant guidelines for the performance of intraoperative neurophysiology. Guidelines are formulated based on exhaustive literature review, recruitment of expert opinion, and broad consensus among ASNM membership. Input is likewise sought from sister societies and related constituencies. Adherence to a literature-based, formalized process characterizes the construction of all ASNM guidelines. The guidelines covering the Professional Practice of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring were initially published January 24th, 2013, and subsequently that document has undergone review and revision to accommodate broad inter- and intra-societal feedback. This current version of the ASNM Professional Practice Guideline was fully approved for publication according to ASNM bylaws on February 22nd, 2018, and thus overwrites and supersedes the initial guideline.

Practice guidelines for the supervising professional: intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring.

The American Society of Neurophysiological Monitoring (ASNM) was founded in 1988 as the American Society of Evoked Potential Monitoring. From the beginning, the Society has been made up of physicians, doctoral degree holders, technologists, and all those interested in furthering the profession. The Society changed its name to the ASNM and held its first Annual Meeting in 1990. It remains the largest worldwide organization dedicated solely to the scientifically based advancement of intraoperative neurophysiology. The primary goal of the ASNM is to assure the quality of patient care during monitored procedures along the neuraxis. This goal is accomplished through programs in education, advocacy of basic and clinical research, and publication of guidelines. The ASNM is committed to the development of medically sound and clinically relevant guidelines for intraoperative neurophysiology. Guidelines are formulated based on exhaustive literature review, recruitment of expert opinion, and broad consensus among ASNM membership. Input is likewise sought from sister societies and related constituencies. Adherence to a literature-based, formalized process characterizes the construction of all ASNM guidelines. The guidelines covering the Professional Practice of intraoperative monitoring were established by a committee of nearly 30 total participants and ultimately endorsed by the Board of Directors of ASNM on January 24th 2013. That document follows.

Best Practices in Facial Nerve Monitoring.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: Facial nerve monitoring (FNM) has evolved into a widely used adjunct for many surgical procedures along the course of the facial nerve. Even though majority opinion holds that FNM reduces the incidence of iatrogenic nerve injury, there are few if any studies yielding high-level evidence and no practice guidelines on which clinicians can rely. Instead, a review of the literature and medicolegal cases reveals significant variations in methodology, training, and clinical indications. STUDY DESIGN: Literature review and expert opinion. METHODS: Given the lack of standard references to serve as a resource for FNM, we assembled a multidisciplinary group of experts representing more than a century of combined monitoring experience to synthesize the literature and provide a rational basis to improve the quality of patient care during FNM. RESULTS: Over the years, two models of monitoring have become well-established: 1) monitoring by the surgeon using a stand-alone device that provides auditory feedback of facial electromyography directly to the surgeon, and 2) a team, typically consisting of surgeon, technologist, and interpreting neurophysiologist. Regardless of the setting and the number of people involved, the reliability of monitoring depends on the integration of proper technical performance, accurate interpretation of responses, and their timely application to the surgical procedure. We describe critical steps in the technical set-up and provide a basis for context-appropriate interpretation and troubleshooting of recorded signals. CONCLUSIONS: We trust this initial attempt to describe best practices will serve as a basis for improving the quality of patient care while reducing inappropriate variations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 131:S1-S42, 2021.

Intraoperative electrophysiologic identification of the nervus intermedius.

OBJECTIVE: Although enormous attention has been directed to the localization and preservation of the facial nerve in acoustic neuroma surgery, the nervus intermedius has largely been ignored. In this article, we describe a method for intraoperative electrophysiologic identification of the nervus intermedius. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case review. SETTING: University hospital (tertiary care center). PATIENTS: Thirty-three patients who underwent intraoperative facial nerve monitoring for various cerebellopontine angle procedures. Recording electrodes were placed in the orbicularis oculi and orbicularis oris muscles. A constant-voltage stimulator was used to stimulate both the facial nerve and the nervus intermedius. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Electrophysiologic response after stimulation of the nervus intermedius. RESULTS: Stimulation of the nervus intermedius produced long-latency, low-amplitude response recorded only on the orbicularis oris channel. The response had a mean threshold 0.4 V, a mean latency of 11.1 ms, and a mean amplitude of 11.1 microV, all significantly different from responses to stimulation the facial nerve. CONCLUSION: Knowledge of electrophysiologic features of nervus intermedius stimulation can help protect the facial nerve during cerebellopontine angle surgery. The surgeon must recognize that stimulation of the nervus intermedius can cause electromyographic activity in the facial nerve monitoring channels, but the main trunk of the facial nerve may lie in entirely different location in the cerebellopontine angle.

Pain measurement with evoked potentials: combination of subjective ratings, randomized intensities, and long interstimulus intervals produces a P300-like confound.

Evoked potentials in response to painful stimuli have been studied as objective measures of pain. Bromm has advocated experimental conditions in which, (1) stimulus intensities are randomized, and (2) subjects rate each stimulus. However, a cognitive, i.e. information processing, 'late positive component' (LPC), e.g. the P300, may be elicited by these same conditions, whether or not the stimuli are painful. The LPC may overlap, and interfere with the measurement of, responses that are only seen with painful stimuli. We compared the LPC in two experimental protocols using ten subjects and electrical stimuli. In the 'Rating Protocol', shocks of different intensity levels were randomly presented and subjects rated the intensity of each stimulus. In the 'Oddball Standards Protocol', the same levels were used, but each was presented in a separate block of a single level. Stimuli were presented more rapidly and subjects had to push a button in response to occasional double shocks (oddball targets), but not to single shocks (oddball standards). The oddball targets served to direct subjects' attention to the stimuli, but only the evoked potential responses to the oddball standards were used for data analysis. To look at the difference between protocols, we computed a difference condition (Rating protocol responses minus Oddball Standards protocol responses) which we called Incremental activity. The Incremental LPC (average amplitudes from 350 to 650 ms) had a more parietal topography (amplitude at electrode Pz greater than at Cz) than the Oddball Standards LPC (Cz > Pz; protocol x electrode interaction P<0.001). This implies that the Rating Protocol LPC included P300-like activity. The parietal Incremental activity began as early as 250-350 ms after the stimulus in the responses to the most painful stimuli and therefore can confound the measurement of pain activity in the evoked potential.

Transcranial motor evoked potentials during basilar artery aneurysm surgery: technique application for 30 consecutive patients.

OBJECTIVE: Microsurgical clipping of basilar artery aneurysms carries a risk of neurological compromise resulting from midbrain or thalamic ischemia. Somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) monitoring and electroencephalography are the standard techniques for assessing the level of cerebroprotective anesthesia and monitoring ischemia during temporary occlusion or after permanent clipping. Transcranial motor evoked potential (TcMEP) monitoring was added to determine whether this modality improved intraoperative monitoring. METHODS: Combined SSEP/electroencephalographic/TcMEP monitoring was used for 30 consecutive patients with basilar artery apex aneurysms in the past 1.5 years. Voltage thresholds were recorded before, during, and after aneurysm treatment for the last 10 patients. RESULTS: All 30 patients underwent an orbitozygomatic craniotomy for clipping (28 patients), wrapping (1 patient), or superficial temporal artery-superior cerebellar artery bypass (1 patient). Electrophysiological changes occurred for 10 patients (33%), elicited by temporary clipping (6 patients), permanent clipping (3 patients), or retraction (1 patient). Isolated SSEP changes were observed for one patient, isolated TcMEP changes for five patients, and changes in both TcMEPs and SSEPs for four patients. Among patients with simultaneous changes, TcMEP abnormalities were more robust and occurred earlier than SSEP abnormalities. Impaired motor conduction was detected first with an increase in the voltage threshold (from 206 +/- 22 to 410 +/- 49 V, P < 0.05, n = 3) and then with loss of TcMEP responses. SSEP and TcMEP signals returned to baseline values for all patients after corrective measures were taken. CONCLUSION: TcMEP monitoring can be safely and easily added to traditional neurophysiological monitoring during basilar artery aneurysm surgery. These results suggest that TcMEPs may be more sensitive than SSEPs to basilar artery and perforating artery ischemia. This additional intraoperative information might minimize the incidence of ischemic complications attributable to prolonged temporary occlusion or inadvertent perforator occlusion.

Neurophysiological monitoring for safe surgical tethered cord syndrome release in adults.

BACKGROUND: Release of tethered spinal cord by sectioning of the filum terminale carries a significant risk of injury to the neighboring motor and sensory nerve roots. Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring techniques can help to minimize these adverse neurologic outcomes. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 67 consecutive patients undergoing tethered cord release. We excluded 52 pediatric patients which limited our study to 15 adult patients treated during a four year period, including patients with a thick filum, low lying conus, myelomeningocele, filum tumor, spinal cord malformation, and/or lipoma. Clinical outcomes were determined from postoperative follow-up visits. Two patients were lost to follow up and were excluded from the clinical outcome analysis. Electrical stimulation of the filum terminale and lumbo-sacral nerve roots in conjunction with electromyogram (EMG) recording was performed intraoperatively. RESULTS: The mean electrical threshold for EMG response during stimulation of the filum terminale was 37.1 volts (V), range 15 to 100 V. In comparison, the lowest threshold obtained by direct stimulation of the ventral nerve roots was a mean of 1.46 V, with a range of 0.1 to 7 V. More than 70% of the patients studied demonstrated a filum to motor root threshold ratio of 100:1 or greater. No patient developed new neurologic symptoms or signs postoperatively. Bowel and bladder function improved in 46% of patients, back pain in 39% and motor function in 31%. Eight percent reported decline in bladder control and worsening back pain postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: The often dramatic difference in the threshold of the filum terminale and adjacent motor nerve roots (100:1) helps to identify, isolate, and safely section the filum terminale. Tethered cord release using intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring is safe and in the majority of cases leads to improvement or at least, stabilization of neurologic function. Monitoring prevented intraoperative nerve root injury that might have resulted in immediate onset of new neurologic deficits caused by the surgical procedure.

Intraoperative monitoring of facial and cochlear nerves during acoustic neuroma surgery. 1992.

Preservation of facial nerve function during acoustic neuroma surgery can be improved significantly by monitoring of facial electromyography (EMG) during surgery. Mechanical trauma during dissection causes EMG activity that can be played over a loudspeaker for direct feedback to the surgeon. Electrical stimulation can be used to locate the nerve even when it is out of direct view, and the threshold for stimulation provides a measure of facial (or other motor nerve) integrity. Cochlear nerve function also can be monitored by the recording of auditory brain stem responses or compound action potentials from an electrode placed on the nerve at the brain stem root entry zone.

Continuous EMG recordings and intraoperative electrical stimulation for identification and protection of cervical nerve roots during foraminal tumor surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Spinal cord function is now routinely monitored with somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) and motor evoked potentials (MEPs) during surgery for intraspinal cervical dumbbell and foraminal tumors. However, upper extremity nerve roots are also at risk during these procedures. Anatomic relations are frequently difficult to interpret because the nerve roots may be displaced by the tumor. We used electrical stimulation with compound muscle action potential (CMAP) recordings at multiple sites to identify the location and course of the involved nerve root and to provide real-time information regarding the functional status of the roots to predict postoperative outcome. METHODS: Ten patients were monitored during surgery for cervical dumbbell or foraminal tumors. SEPs and MEPs were monitored as a routine procedure. CMAPs were recorded from needle electrodes placed in the deltoid, biceps, triceps, and flexor carpi ulnaris muscles. Spontaneous electromyography (EMG) muscle activity was also continuously monitored. A handheld monopolar stimulation electrode was used to elicit evoked EMG responses to identify and trace the course of nerves in relation to the tumor. In four patients, the stimulation threshold was tested before and after tumor resection to predict postoperative nerve root function. RESULTS: Electrical stimulation with CMAP recording was successful in localizing nerve roots during tumor resection in all 10 patients. Monitoring predicted postoperative nerve root preservation after tumor removal in each case. It was possible to identify either by using low-level stimulation (<2.0 V) or by observing changes in spontaneous EMG amplitude if activation was present during surgical dissection. The monitoring of spontaneous muscle activity in response to direct or indirect surgical manipulation during tumor resection also provided continuous assessment of nerve root function and identified any physiologic disturbance induced by surgical manipulation. CONCLUSIONS: Electrical stimulation in the operating field and recording of CMAPs facilitated nerve root identification and predicted postoperative function during dissection and separation from ligamentous or neoplastic tissue in 10 patients. Electrical stimulation might also be useful to predict postoperative preservation of function when nerve root sacrifice is necessary and no motor response is detected intraoperatively.

Clinical outcome in children undergoing tethered cord release utilizing intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring.

Release of tethered spinal cord by sectioning of the filum terminale carries a risk of injuring neighboring motor and sensory nerve roots involved in bowel and bladder control. Therefore, intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring techniques have been developed to prevent neurological complications postoperatively. We performed a retrospective chart review of 63 patients who had undergone tethered cord release. We excluded adult patients, those lost to follow-up and patients with either a myelomeningocele and/or lipoma. This limited our study to 25 pediatric patients, aged 4 months to 12 years, who underwent tethered cord release for either a thickened filum terminale and/or a low-lying conus. For intraoperative monitoring, we utilized electrical stimulation of the filum terminale, lumbosacral nerve roots and electromyography recordings. Ventral nerve roots were identified and their electrical thresholds obtained. The mean was 0.32 V, the mode 0.1 V and the range 0.05-1.0 V. These values were compared to electrical thresholds obtained by stimulation of the filum terminale. The mean was 26.1 V, the mode 20.0 V and the range 8-100 V. In over 70% of patients, muscle activation via the filum required 100 times the voltage needed to activate a motor root. This motor root to filum threshold of 1:100 was useful in identifying the filum. Clinical outcome showed no significant worsening with respect to bowel and bladder control or pain and motor indices. Significant bowel and bladder improvement was seen in 4 out of 25 patients, motor improvement in 9 out of 25 patients and improvement of pain in 4 out of 25 patients. Three patients developed postoperative urinary tract infections, but no cerebrospinal fluid leaks or pseudomeningoceles were encountered. These results suggest that patients with a thickened filum or low-lying conus can safely undergo tethered cord release. Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring provides a helpful adjunct to distinguish nerve roots from the filum. A ratio, rather than an absolute number, is beneficial in distinguishing motor roots from the filum and eliminates variability due to patients' individual differences in electrical thresholds.