American Journal of Electroneurodiagnostic Technology最新文献

U.S. Healthcare is not a system but a fragmentation of care delivery mechanisms. Healthcare Reform drives at reducing costs through access, quality, and efficiency. The U.S. economy contracted in 2007 and healthcare spending increased consuming an even greater and potentially unsustainable share of the economic wealth. Affordable care means "shared risk." The Patient Protection and Accountable Care Act (PPACA) was signed into law on March 23, 2010. The bill outlines the next ten years for new policies and pilot programs. More profound for us are the many provisions that promote fundamental delivery system reform. At this time, the burden of leadership is immense. Our profession needs a large cadre of qualified leaders to shape the future.

Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring (IONM) is becoming the standard of care for many spinal surgeries, especially those with deformity correction and instrumentation. We reviewed 2069 spine cases with multimodality IONM including somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP), transcranial electrical motor evoked potentials (TCeMEP), and spontaneous and triggered electromyography (s-EMG and t-EMG) in a University setting over a period of four years to examine perioperative clinical findings when an IONM event was noted and to ascertain how IONM has affected our ability to avoid potential neurological injury during spine surgery. We performed a retrospective analysis of cases from 2006 to 2010 to study the frequency and cause of intraoperative events detected via IONM and the clinical outcome of the patient. There were 32 cases (1.5%) with possible intraoperative events. There were 17 (53%) cases where IONM changes affected the course of the surgery and prevented possible postoperative neurological deficits. Seven cases (41%) were due to deformity correction, five (29%) due to hypotension, four (24%) due to patient positioning, and one (6%) due to a screw requiring repositioning. None of the 17 patients had postoperative motor or sensory deficits. There were four cases with false-positive IONM findings due to correctible technical issues. Three cases required surgical revision due to pedicle screw malposition. In each case, s-EMGs failed to exhibit intraoperative changes but the patient presented with postoperative radiculopathy. We believe that the use of t-EMGs may have prevented these complications. This review reinforces the importance of multimodality IONM for spinal surgery. The incidence of possible events in our series was 1.5%, and several likely postoperative neurologic deficits were avoided by intraoperative intervention.

Cerebral motor evoked potential (MEP) monitoring during arteriovenous malformation (AVM) embolization is not well studied (Söderman et al. 2003). Alterations of cerebral blood flow (CBF) during cerebral embolization could cause ischemia/infarction to the cerebral cortex. Permanent loss of MEPs is correlated with a permanent motor deficit. We report a case of a patient undergoing AVM embolization during which transcranial electrical motor evoked potentials (TCeMEP) reliably predicted changes to CBF induced by selective methohexital testing. Our finding demonstrated that MEPs are a useful means of intraoperative monitoring of motor pathway integrity and predicting changes. The loss of MEP predicted and prevented severe postoperative motor deficits. Intraoperative neuromonitoring with SSEP, TCeMEP and continuous EEG revealed no changes until the posterior cerebral artery (PCA), but not the anterior cerebral artery (ACA), was injected. TCeMEP may be superior to somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) and EEG monitoring in predicting motor impairment during AVM surgery.

The use of somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) to monitor upper extremity nerves during surgery is becoming more accepted as a valid and useful technique to minimize intraoperative nerve injuries. We present a case illustrating the benefit of utilizing both SSEPs and transcranial electrical motor evoked potentials (TCeMEPs) for preventing position-related injury during surgery. The patient was a 43-year-old male with a history of neck pain, along with numbness and tingling of the upper extremities. While the patient was being draped, upper extremity SSEPs diminished significantly TCeMEP responses in the hands (abductor pollicus brevis-abductor digiti minimi; APB-ADM) vanished shortly after that, followed by the biceps and left deltoid. The surgeons were notified, and the tape on the shoulders was loosened. No improvements were noted in SSEPs nor TCeMEPs due to this intervention, so all tape was removed and the patient's arms were allowed to rest naturally upon the arm boards. Upper extremity TCeMEP responses could then be elicited and SSEPs improved shortly afterward. Surgery was completed with the arms on the arm boards. All signals remained stable for the remaining three hours of the procedure. At two months follow-up, the patient was well with total pain relief and normal upper extremity function when neurological examination was performed. This report demonstrates a case in which intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring was useful in identifying and reversing impending nerve injury during cervical spine surgery. Significant changes were seen in SSEPs as well as TCeMEPs, so we recommend that TCeMEP monitoring be considered as an adjunct to SSEPs for prevention of injury to the brachial plexus.

Therapeutic hypothermia is being utilized as a neuroprotective strategy in neonates, children, and adults. The most common indications are hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy in neonates and post cardiac arrest in adults. Electroencephalographic monitoring use is increasing in critical care units, and is sometimes a component of therapeutic hypothermia clinical pathways. Monitoring may detect non-convulsive seizures or non-convulsive status epilepticus, and it may provide prognostic information. We review data regarding indications for therapeutic hypothermia and electroencephalographic monitoring in neonatal, pediatric, and adult critical care units, and discuss technical aspects related to such monitoring.

Motor evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited by both direct cortical stimulation (DCS) and transcranial electrical stimulation are used during brain tumor resection. Parallel use of direct cortical stimulation motor evoked potentials (DCS-MEPs) and transcranial electrical stimulation motor evoked potentials (TCeMEPs) has been practiced during brain tumor resection. We report that DCS-MEPs elicited by direct subdural grid stimulation, but not TCeMEPs, detected brain ischemia during brain tumor resection. Following resection of a brainstem high-grade glioma in a 21-year-old, the threshold of cortical motor-evoked-potentials (cMEPs) increased from 13 mA to 20 mA while amplitudes decreased. No changes were noted in transcranial motor evoked potentials (TCMEPs), somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs), auditory evoked potentials (AEPs), anesthetics, or hemodynamic parameters. Our case showed the loss of cMEPs and SSEPs, but not TCeMEPs. Permanent loss of DCS-MEPs and SSEPs was correlated with permanent left hemiplegia in our patient even when appropriate action was taken. Parallel use of DCS- and TCeMEPs with SSEPs improves sensitivity of intraoperative detection of motor impairment. DCS may be superior to TCeMEPs during brain tumor resection.