Effect of Remimazolam on Transcranial Electrical Motor-evoked Potential in Spine Surgery: A Prospective, Preliminary, Dose-escalation Study.

BACKGROUND: Some anesthetic drugs reduce the amplitude of transcranial electrical motor-evoked potentials (MEPs). Remimazolam, a new benzodiazepine, has been suggested to have little effect on MEP amplitude. This prospective, preliminary, dose-escalation study aimed to assess whether remimazolam is associated with lower MEP amplitude in a dose-dependent manner. METHODS: Ten adult patients scheduled for posterior spinal fusion were included in this study. General anesthesia was induced with a continuous infusion of remifentanil and remimazolam. After the patient lost consciousness, the infusion rate of remimazolam was set to 1 mg/kg/h, and the patient underwent tracheal intubation. Baseline MEPs were recorded under 1 mg/kg/h of remimazolam in a prone position. Thereafter, the infusion rate of remimazolam was increased to 2 mg/kg/h, with a bolus of 0.1 mg/kg. Ten minutes after the increment, the evoked potentials were then recorded again. The primary endpoint was the MEP amplitude recorded in the left gastrocnemius muscle at 2 time points. RESULTS: There was no difference in MEP amplitude recorded from the left gastrocnemius muscle before and after increasing remimazolam (median [interquartile range]: 0.93 [0.65 to 1.25] mV and 0.70 [0.43 to 1.26] mV, respectively; P=0.08). The average time from the cessation of remimazolam administration to neurological examination after surgery was 4 minutes using flumazenil. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study suggests that increasing remimazolam from 1 to 2 mg/kg/h might have an insignificant effect on transcranial electric MEPs.

Delayed paraparesis after posterior spinal fusion for congenital scoliosis: a case report.

INTRODUCTION: Although multimodal intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM), which has high sensitivity and specificity, is typically performed during spinal deformity surgery, neurological status may deteriorate with delay after surgical maneuvers. Here, we report a rare case of delayed postoperative neurological deficit (DPND) that was not detected by IONM during posterior spinal fusion (PSF) for congenital scoliosis. CASE PRESENTATION: A 14-year-old male presented with congenital scoliosis associated with T3 and T10 hemivertebrae. Preoperative Cobb angle of proximal thoracic (PT) and main thoracic (MT) curves were 50° and 41°, respectively. PSF (T1-L1) without hemivertebrectomy was performed, and the curves were corrected to 31° and 21° in the PT and MT curves, respectively, without any abnormal findings in IONM, blood pressure, or hemoglobin level. However, postoperative neurological examination revealed complete loss of motor function. A revision surgery, release of the curve correction by removing the rods, was immediately performed and muscle strength completely recovered on the first postoperative day. Five days postoperatively, PSF was achieved with less curve correction (36° in the PT curve and 26° in the MT curve), without postoperative neurological deficits. DISCUSSION: Possible mechanisms of DPND in our patient are spinal cord ischemia due to spinal cord traction caused by scoliosis correction and spinal cord kinking by the pedicle at the concave side. Understanding the possible mechanisms of intra- and postoperative neural injury is essential for appropriate intervention in each situation. Additionally, IONM should be continued to at least skin closure to detect DPND observed in our patient.

Low-dose Droperidol Reduces the Amplitude of Transcranial Electrical Motor-evoked Potential: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Low-dose droperidol has been reported to suppress the amplitude of transcranial electrical motor-evoked potentials (TCE-MEPs), but no randomized controlled trials have been conducted to assess this. This randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial aimed to test the hypothesis that low-dose droperidol reduced TCE-MEP amplitudes. METHODS: Twenty female patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, aged between 12 and 20 years, and scheduled to undergo corrective surgery were randomly allocated to receive droperidol (20 µg/kg) or 0.9% saline. After recording baseline TCE-MEPs, the test drug was administered, following which TCE-MEP recordings were carried out every 2 minutes for up to 10 minutes. The primary outcome was the minimum relative TCE-MEP amplitude (peak-to-peak amplitude, percentage of baseline value) recorded in the left tibialis anterior muscle. Secondary outcomes included minimum relative MEP amplitudes recorded from all other muscle groups monitored in the study. Data are expressed as medians (interquartile range). RESULTS: The TCE-MEP amplitude of the left tibialis anterior muscle was significantly reduced following droperidol administration compared with saline (37% [30% to 55%] vs. 76% [58% to 93%], respectively, P <0.01). In the other muscles, the amplitudes were reduced in the droperidol group, except for the bilateral abductor pollicis brevis and the left quadriceps femoris muscles. The relative amplitude of the bilateral F waves recorded from the gastrocnemius was decreased in the droperidol group. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose droperidol (20 µg/kg) reduced TCE-MEP amplitudes. Anesthesiologists should pay attention to the timing of droperidol administration during intraoperative TCE-MEP recordings, even if used in a low dose.

Propofol reduces the amplitude of transcranial electrical motor-evoked potential without affecting spinal motor neurons: a prospective, single-arm, interventional study.

PURPOSE: Propofol inhibits the amplitudes of transcranial electrical motor-evoked potentials (TCE-MEP) in a dose-dependent manner. However, the mechanisms of this effect remain unknown. Hence, we investigated the spinal mechanisms of the inhibitory effect of propofol on TCE-MEP amplitudes by evaluating evoked electromyograms (H-reflex and F-wave) under general anesthesia. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, single-arm, interventional study including 15 patients scheduled for spine surgery under general anesthesia. Evoked electromyograms of the soleus muscle and TCE-MEPs were measured at three propofol concentrations using target-controlled infusion (TCI: 2.0, 3.0, and 4.0 µg/mL). The primary outcome measure was the left H-reflex amplitude during TCI of 4.0- compared to 2.0-µg/mL propofol administration. RESULTS: The median [interquartile range] amplitudes of the left H-reflex were 4.71 [3.42-6.60] and 5.6 [4.17-7.46] in the 4.0- and 2.0-µg/mL TCI groups (p = 0.4, Friedman test), respectively. There were no significant differences in the amplitudes of the right H-reflex and the bilateral F-wave among these groups. However, the TCE-MEP amplitudes significantly decreased with increased propofol concentrations (p < 0.001, Friedman test). CONCLUSION: Propofol did not affect the amplitudes of the H-reflex and the F-wave, whereas TCE-MEP amplitudes were reduced at higher propofol concentrations. These results suggested that propofol can suppress the TCE-MEP amplitude by inhibiting the supraspinal motor pathways more strongly than the excitability of the motor neurons in the spinal cord.

Epidural Administration of Ropivacaine Reduces the Amplitude of Transcranial Electrical Motor-Evoked Potentials: A Double-Blinded, Randomized, Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: An epidurally administered local anesthetic acts primarily on the epidural nerve roots and can act directly on the spinal cord through the dural sleeve. We hypothesized that epidurally administered ropivacaine would reduce the amplitude of transcranial electrical motor-evoked potentials by blocking nerve conduction in the spinal cord. Therefore, we conducted a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. METHODS: Thirty adult patients who underwent lung surgery were randomly allocated to 1 of 3 groups, based on the ropivacaine concentration: the 0.2% group, the 0.375% group, and the 0.75% group. The attending anesthesiologists, neurophysiologists, and patients were blinded to the allocation. The epidural catheter was inserted at the T5-6 or T6-7 interspace by a paramedian approach, using the loss of resistance technique with normal saline. General anesthesia was induced and maintained using propofol and remifentanil. Transcranial electrical motor-evoked potentials were elicited by a train of 5 pulses with an interstimulus interval of 2 milliseconds by using a constant-voltage stimulator and were recorded from the tibialis anterior muscle. Somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEPs) were evoked by electrical tibial nerve stimulation at the popliteal fossa. After measuring the baseline values of these evoked potentials, 10 mL of epidural ropivacaine was administered at the 0.2%, 0.375%, or 0.75% concentration. The baseline amplitudes and latencies recorded before administering ropivacaine were defined as 100%. Our primary end point was the relative amplitude of the motor-evoked potentials at 60 minutes after the epidural administration of ropivacaine. We analyzed the amplitudes and latencies of these evoked potentials by using the Kruskal-Wallis test and used the Dunn multiple comparison test as the post hoc test for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The data are expressed as the median (interquartile range). Sixty minutes after epidurally administering ropivacaine, the motor-evoked potential amplitude was lower in the 0.75% group (7% [3%-18%], between-group difference P < .001) and in the 0.375% group (52% [43%-59%]) compared to that in the 0.2% group (96% [89%-105%]). The latency of SSEP was longer in the 0.75% group compared to that in the 0.2% group, but the amplitude was unaffected. CONCLUSIONS: Epidurally administered high-dose ropivacaine lowered the amplitude of motor-evoked potentials and prolonged the onset latencies of motor-evoked potentials and SSEPs compared to those in the low-dose group. High-dose ropivacaine can act on the motor pathway through the dura mater.

A Bolus Dose of Ketamine Reduces the Amplitude of the Transcranial Electrical Motor-evoked Potential: A Randomized, Double-blinded, Placebo-controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: A low-dose bolus or infusion of ketamine does not affect transcranial electrical motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitude, but a dose ≥1 mg/kg may reduce MEP amplitude. We conducted a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the effect of ketamine (1 mg/kg) on transcranial electrical MEP. METHODS: Twenty female patients (aged 12 to 18 y) with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis scheduled to undergo posterior spinal fusion were randomly allocated to receive ketamine or saline. General anesthesia was induced and maintained with continuous infusions of propofol and remifentanil. MEP was elicited by supramaximal transcranial electrical stimulation. MEP recordings were obtained at baseline and then at 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 minutes after administration of ketamine (1 mg/kg) or saline (0.1 ml/kg). The primary endpoint was the minimum relative MEP amplitude (peak-to-peak amplitude, % of baseline value) recorded from the left tibialis anterior muscle. The baseline amplitude recorded before test drug administration was defined as 100%. RESULTS: Medians (interquartile range) minimum MEP amplitudes in the left tibialis anterior muscle in the ketamine and saline groups were 26% (9% to 34%) and 87% (55% to 103%) of the baseline value, respectively (P<0.001). MEP amplitudes in other muscles were significantly reduced by ketamine. The suppressive effect of ketamine lasted for at least 10 minutes in each muscle. CONCLUSION: A 1-mg/kg bolus dose of ketamine can reduce MEP amplitude. Anesthesiologists should consider the dosage and timing of intravenous ketamine administration during MEP monitoring.

Low-dose droperidol suppresses transcranial electrical motor-evoked potential amplitude: a retrospective study.

Low-dose droperidol has been widely used as an antiemetic during and after surgery. Although high-dose droperidol affects motor-evoked potential, the effects of low-dose droperidol on motor-evoked potential amplitude are unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate whether low-dose droperidol affects motor-evoked potential amplitude. We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients who underwent spine surgery under general anesthesia with motor-evoked potential monitoring from February 2016 to 2017. The outcome was the motor-evoked potential amplitude of the bilateral abductor pollicis brevis muscle, tibialis anterior muscle, and abductor hallucis muscle within 1 and 1-2 h after droperidol administration, compared with the baseline motor-evoked potential value. Thirty-four patients were analyzed. The median dose of droperidol was 21 µg/kg. The motor-evoked potential amplitudes of all muscles were significantly reduced after droperidol administration and recovered to baseline values within 2 h. The reduction of all motor-evoked potential amplitudes after droperidol administration was 37-45% of baseline values. There were no significant differences in other drugs administered. There were no serious adverse effects of droperidol administration. Motor-evoked potential amplitude was suppressed by low-dose droperidol. During intraoperative motor-evoked potential monitoring in spine surgery, anesthesiologists should pay careful attention to the timing of administration of droperidol, even at low doses. Based on the results of this study, we are conducting a randomized controlled trial.

Marked attenuation of the amplitude of transcranial motor-evoked potentials after intravenous bolus administration of ketamine: a case report.

BACKGROUND: It is believed that ketamine does not affect motor-evoked potential amplitude, whereas various anesthetic drugs attenuate the amplitude of transcranial motor-evoked potential. However, we encountered a patient with marked attenuation of motor-evoked potential amplitude after intravenous bolus administration of ketamine. CASE PRESENTATION: A 15-year-old Japanese girl with a diagnosis of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis was admitted to our hospital to undergo posterior spinal fusion at T4-L3. After induction of general anesthesia using a continuous infusion of propofol and remifentanil, we confirmed that transcranial electrical motor-evoked potentials were being recorded correctly. Ketamine 1.25 mg/kg was administered intravenously for intraoperative and postoperative analgesia. About 3 minutes later, the motor-evoked potential amplitude was markedly attenuated. No other drugs were administered except for ketamine. The patient's vital signs were stable, and the surgery had not yet started. The motor-evoked potential amplitude was recovered at about 6 minutes after administration of ketamine. The surgery was performed uneventfully, and the patient had no neurologic deficit when she emerged from general anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is a widely held belief in the field of anesthesiology that ketamine does not affect motor-evoked potential amplitude, it has been suggested that ketamine could affect its monitoring.