Utility of evoked potentials during anterior cerebral artery and anterior communicating artery aneurysm clipping

IF 2 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES Clinical Neurophysiology Practice Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.cnp.2022.07.001
Ferenc Rabai , Claire M. Dorey , W. Christopher Fox , Krista M. Fitzgerald , Christoph N. Seubert , Steven A. Robicsek
{"title":"Utility of evoked potentials during anterior cerebral artery and anterior communicating artery aneurysm clipping","authors":"Ferenc Rabai ,&nbsp;Claire M. Dorey ,&nbsp;W. Christopher Fox ,&nbsp;Krista M. Fitzgerald ,&nbsp;Christoph N. Seubert ,&nbsp;Steven A. Robicsek","doi":"10.1016/j.cnp.2022.07.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To investigate the optimal combination of somatosensory- and transcranial motor-evoked potential (SSEP/tcMEP) modalities and monitored extremities during clip reconstruction of aneurysms of the anterior cerebral artery (ACA) and its branches.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A retrospective review of 104 cases of surgical clipping of ruptured and unruptured aneurysms was performed. SSEP/tcMEP changes and postoperative motor deficits (PMDs) were assessed from upper and lower extremities (UE/LE) to determine the diagnostic accuracy of each modality separately and in combination.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>PMDs were reported in 9 of 104 patients; 7 LE and 8 UE (3.6% of 415 extremities). Evoked potential (EP) monitoring failed to predict a PMD in 8 extremities (1.9%). Seven of 8 false negatives had subarachnoid hemorrhage. Sensitivity and specificity in LE were 50% and 97% for tcMEP, 71% and 98% for SSEP, and 83% and 98% for dual-monitoring of both tcMEP/SSEP. Sensitivity and specificity in UE were 38% and 99% for tcMEP, and 50% and 97% for tcMEP/SSEP, respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Combined tcMEP/SSEP is more accurate than single-modality monitoring for LE but is relatively insensitive for UE PMDs.</p></div><div><h3>Significance</h3><p>During ACA aneurysm clipping, multiple factors may confound the ability of EP monitoring to predict PMDs, especially brachiofacial hemiparesis caused by perforator insufficiency.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45697,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Neurophysiology Practice","volume":"7 ","pages":"Pages 228-238"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/b5/64/main.PMC9352509.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Neurophysiology Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2467981X22000270","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Objective

To investigate the optimal combination of somatosensory- and transcranial motor-evoked potential (SSEP/tcMEP) modalities and monitored extremities during clip reconstruction of aneurysms of the anterior cerebral artery (ACA) and its branches.

Methods

A retrospective review of 104 cases of surgical clipping of ruptured and unruptured aneurysms was performed. SSEP/tcMEP changes and postoperative motor deficits (PMDs) were assessed from upper and lower extremities (UE/LE) to determine the diagnostic accuracy of each modality separately and in combination.

Results

PMDs were reported in 9 of 104 patients; 7 LE and 8 UE (3.6% of 415 extremities). Evoked potential (EP) monitoring failed to predict a PMD in 8 extremities (1.9%). Seven of 8 false negatives had subarachnoid hemorrhage. Sensitivity and specificity in LE were 50% and 97% for tcMEP, 71% and 98% for SSEP, and 83% and 98% for dual-monitoring of both tcMEP/SSEP. Sensitivity and specificity in UE were 38% and 99% for tcMEP, and 50% and 97% for tcMEP/SSEP, respectively.

Conclusions

Combined tcMEP/SSEP is more accurate than single-modality monitoring for LE but is relatively insensitive for UE PMDs.

Significance

During ACA aneurysm clipping, multiple factors may confound the ability of EP monitoring to predict PMDs, especially brachiofacial hemiparesis caused by perforator insufficiency.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
大脑前动脉和前交通动脉瘤夹闭过程中诱发电位的应用
目的探讨躯体感觉与经颅运动诱发电位(SSEP/tcMEP)结合治疗脑前动脉及其分支动脉瘤夹闭重建的最佳方法。方法回顾性分析104例动脉瘤破裂与未破裂手术夹闭的临床资料。从上肢和下肢(UE/LE)评估SSEP/tcMEP变化和术后运动缺陷(PMDs),以确定每种模式单独或联合诊断的准确性。结果104例患者中9例出现spmd;7例LE和8例UE(占415例的3.6%)。诱发电位(EP)监测未能预测8个肢体的PMD(1.9%)。8例假阴性中有7例蛛网膜下腔出血。tcMEP对LE的敏感性和特异性分别为50%和97%,SSEP为71%和98%,tcMEP/SSEP双监测分别为83%和98%。UE对tcMEP的敏感性和特异性分别为38%和99%,对tcMEP/SSEP的敏感性和特异性分别为50%和97%。结论tcMEP/SSEP联合监测LE比单模监测更准确,但对UE PMDs相对不敏感。意义在ACA动脉瘤夹闭术中,多种因素可能会影响EP监测对PMDs的预测能力,尤其是穿支不全引起的臂面偏瘫。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
审稿时长
71 days
期刊介绍: Clinical Neurophysiology Practice (CNP) is a new Open Access journal that focuses on clinical practice issues in clinical neurophysiology including relevant new research, case reports or clinical series, normal values and didactic reviews. It is an official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology and complements Clinical Neurophysiology which focuses on innovative research in the specialty. It has a role in supporting established clinical practice, and an educational role for trainees, technicians and practitioners.
期刊最新文献
Primary progressive aphasia with focal periodic sharp wave complexes: An unusual manifestation of Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease Effects of sleep deprivation on cortical excitability: A threshold-tracking TMS study and review of the literature The role of clinical neurophysiology in the definition and assessment of fatigue and fatigability Diagnosis and differential diagnosis of MND/ALS: IFCN handbook chapter Clinical neurophysiology of REM parasomnias: Diagnostic aspects and insights into pathophysiology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1